UK Home Office: Probation Bench Handbook 2nd Edition 2007

Probation
Bench
Handbook
A guide to the work of the National Probation
Service for Judges and other Sentencers
Edition Two
August 2007
The information in this publication draws upon material prepared by the National Offender
Management Service (NOMS) at the Ministry of Justice to help probation staff implement the
sentencing framework introduced through the Criminal Justice Act 2003. It is consistent with
guidance from the Sentencing Guidelines Council. In some instances it sets out the views of
NOMS as to the interpretation of the Act.
NOMS wishes to make clear that this publication is intended solely to inform and assist. It
is not intended to constrain or in any other way interfere with the independence of those
members of the judiciary who, it is hoped, will find it a useful reference work.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Probation Bench Manual is a National Probation Service publication.
The Probation Bench Manual editorial steering group was Ruth Allan, Richard Mason, and
Susan Lord (National Offender Management Service) and His Honour Judge Stone QC.
Many probation staff contributed their knowledge and expertise to the compilation of this
manual. Despite all this valued assistance, the publication remains entirely the responsibility
of the National Offender Management Service and any errors or omissions are ours.
Foreword
FOREWORD
I welcome the ��

National Offender Management Service��
s’s initiative in producing this
comprehensive guide to the Probation Service’s work with the courts. This is the second
edition of the Manual which has proved a most valuable publication for judges.
The manual comes at a time of continuing change in the Criminal Justice System. The
Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduced new sentences which affect many sentencing
decisions and much of the work of the National Probation Service. This manual does not
set out to cover legal aspects of the new sentencing regime – that is a task for the Judicial
Studies Board – but it seeks to provide a practical guide to the implementation of the
sentencing options available to the court and to provide a valuable insight into the thinking
behind proposals made in pre-sentence reports. It is invaluable to have in this book a
practical guide to those sentencing changes.
I welcome the exposition in the manual of the Community Order together with the
Requirements which can be imposed under it and the increased flexibility which those
sentencing provisions afford for sentences in the community. I also welcome the increased
range of options now available as alternatives to short custodial sentences.
At the other end of the spectrum I welcome the guidance on long-term supervision which
is offered under the new indeterminate sentences and the emphasis on the assessment of
harm posed by high-risk offenders in the community. I also welcome the exposition of key
provisions relating to mentally disordered offenders.
I am certain that this manual will prove a valuable companion for all those engaged in the
Criminal Justice System.
Lord Chief Justice

Preface
PREFACE
All those involved in the Criminal Justice System have a shared aim to see the system
become more effective at reducing crime and rehabilitating offenders. This is a time of major
reform which offers us the opportunity to build essential partnerships to accomplish real and
lasting change.
The new sentencing framework provided by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 has given the
courts more effective sentences. Most importantly, there are alternative solutions to replace
current short custodial sentences, and the new generic Community Order offers a menu of
interventions and levels of supervision which can be individually tailored to match the risk,
need and the seriousness of the offending. In addition, there are initiatives to revitalise the
fine.
Making these penalties available and credible is, of course, essential, but targeting them at
the right people is also crucial. The Sentencing Guidelines Council provides guidance on
the appropriate level of punishment for particular offences, taking into account what is cost-
effective in terms of sentencing. We in the National Probation Service need to ensure that
we play a full part in this process by providing all the feedback that we can to sentencers
about what works.
Targeting the right sentence on the right offender needs to be followed through with
delivering that sentence in a properly planned and managed way. That is why we have
developed an offender management approach that is now used nationally for all offenders,
whether in prison or in the community. Such an approach is crucial to the new sentences
introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 so that there is greater continuity through the
management of the whole sentence, in the form of an ‘end-to-end’ approach to sentence
delivery with interventions being delivered to the right person at the right time.
This manual provides a detailed guide to the services that Probation offers the courts
– the range of reports it can provide, the risk assessment process and its application,
and the range of sentences and interventions available. It does not purport to be an
authoritative representation of the law. It forms an important strand in our communications
with sentencers and should help to ensure that you get the best out of our services and
resources. In so doing, the manual seeks to underpin our shared aim of providing more
effective sentences and, ultimately, reducing crime and increasing public confidence in the
Criminal Justice System.
Roger Hill
Director
National Probation Service
II
Contents
CONTENTS
Foreword I
Preface II
Introduction: The Sentencing Provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 1
Chapter 1: Bail 2-5
Bail information reports 2

Tagging on bail 2
Referral to approved premises 3
Chapter 2: Pre-Sentence Reports 6-8
Chapter 3: Community Order 9-29
The Requirements 10-11

• Unpaid work 12
• Activity 13-14
• Programme 15
• Prohibited Activity 16
• Curfew 17
• Exclusion 18
• Residence 19
• Mental health treatment 20
• Drug rehabilitation 21
• Alcohol treatment 22
• Supervision 23-24
• Attendance Centre 25
Enforcement of Community Orders 26-28

Prolific and Priority Offenders (PPOs) 29
Chapter 4: Electronic Monitoring 30-35
Chapter 5: Custodial Sentences (including licence arrangements) 36-44
Prison sentences of 12 months or longer 36

Public protection sentences 37 -39
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements 40-41
Work with victims 42-44
Chapter 6: Mentally Disordered Offenders 45-52
Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment 49-52
III
Contents
Appendices 53-82
1. Offender Assessment 53-56
2. Offender Management 57
3. Offending Behaviour Programmes 58-75
• The Accreditation Process 59

• Enhanced Thinking Skills 60
• Think First 61
• One to One 62
• The Women’s Programme 63
• Aggression Replacement Training (ART) 64
• Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) 65
• Community – Sex Offender Group Programme (C-SOGP) 66
• Thames Valley – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (TV-SOGP) 67
• Northumbria – Sex Offender Group Programme (N-SOGP) 68
• Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme (i-SOTP) 69
• Drink Impaired Drivers (DIDs) 70
• Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO) 71
• Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP) 72
• Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse (PRISM) 73
• Community Domestic Violence Programme (CDVP) 74
• Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP) 75
4. Conditional Cautions 76-77
5. Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions 78-80
6. National Standards summary 81
7. Glossary 82
IV
Introduction
THE SENTENCING
PROVISIONS IN THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003
The sentencing framework
The Act makes radical changes to the structure of prison and community sentences. It sets
out the purposes of sentencing as follows:
• The punishment of offenders

• The reduction of crime (including its reduction by deterrence)
• The reform and rehabilitation of offenders
• The protection of the public
• The making of reparation by offenders to persons affected by their offence(s)
The new sentences
The Criminal Justice Act sentences currently in force are:
• Community Order
• Determinate Sentences of 12 months or longer
• Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection
• Extended Sentence for Public Protection
These provisions were implemented on 4 April 2005 and apply to offences committed on or
after that date.
The sentences and provisions not yet implemented are:
• Custody Plus – not available.

• Petty Persistence (Section 151). The resources are not yet in place to implement this
provision, so no date has been set,
The under 12 months custodial sentence with automatic unconditional release at the
halfway point will continue to be available.
Other New or Revised Disposals:
The Act also introduces Conditional Cautions in pilot areas and new provisions to strengthen
Deferment of Sentence. The conditions available with a caution are aimed at reparation
for the offence and rehabilitation of the offender. The legislation extends the scope of the
National Probation Service so that it can play a role, if appropriate. The deferred sentence
provisions allow the courts to appoint an officer of the Probation Board or any other person
it considers suitable to monitor the offender during the period of deferment.

Chapter 1 - Bail
BAIL
Bail Information Reports
The Probation Service currently provides a bail information report service in a limited
number of courts. Where the service is available, it is normally targeted at defendants from
black and minority ethnic communities, young adults and women or is provided in response
to requests from the defence.
All local prisons have bail information officers who produce bail information reports in
respect of remand prisoners for hearings other than the first hearing, and these are normally
targeted at the same groups and at those who are bailable.
Bail information reports are intended to assist the Court in determining a defendant’s
suitability for bail by providing the Court with verified information to add to their factual
knowledge of the defendant, including an assessment of risk of harm to the public and
accommodation options. Bail information reports may help courts decide whether a
defendant may be granted bail subject to conditions, perhaps including accommodation
and/or support (see below) and/or electronic monitoring (see below and Chapter 4).
Bail information services in the local prisons are being enhanced in 2007 to allow more
defendants to be interviewed and more reports to be provided to Courts.
Tagging On Bail
A curfew monitored with an electronic tag is available as a condition of bail for both adult
and juvenile offenders. In September 2005 Her Majesty’s Courts Service (HMCS) sent
out information to sentencers inviting courts considering a remand in custody to consider
imposing a curfew backed by electronic monitoring as an alternative to such a remand.
The use of tagging on bail for adults has increased considerably in the last year, particularly
since the issue in September 2006 of Home Office Circular 25/2006 which sets out the
procedures to be followed by courts, the Electronic Monitoring suppliers and the police
when the Court decides that a curfew is to be monitored electronically with a tag.
Bail Accommodation and Support Services
NOMS is introducing a bail accommodation and bail support service for adult defendants.
The services will be available by July 2007 and will be provided by ClearSprings Ltd. on a
regional basis. The contract will be managed by the Regional Offender Managers and the
Director of Offender Management for Wales.
The availability of these accommodation and support services will provide Courts, in
appropriate cases, with alternatives to remand in custody for defendants who are currently
unable to provide a bail address, or who could not be bailed without support.
The accommodation will be in small shared (typically 3 sharing) flats and houses in the
community, not in hostels. All those given accommodation will be given induction and move-
in support and will be helped to find accommodation to move-on into on completion of bail
(unless they are then sentenced to custody, or return to the home address).

Chapter 1 - Bail
The support services will offer three contact sessions in each of the first three weeks
followed by one session a week thereafter. Courts may wish to make attendance at these a
condition of bail. The support worker will help the defendant to comply with bail, to maintain
the ‘tenancy’ and to address any offending-related needs, in part through engaging existing
specialist public and voluntary services as appropriate. The support worker will work in
liaison with the Offender Manager in those cases where one is allocated by probation.
Defendants will be reminded to attend court and the contractor will monitor behaviour,
initiating breach procedures as necessary.
These support services are available also for those who have accommodation but could not
be bailed without such support.
The availability of accommodation and/or support for individual defendants will be

communicated to the Courts through bail information reports which will be sent from prisons
to the CPS, defence and to the Court in time for the hearing.
It is open to Courts to apply a curfew order supported by tagging on defendants who are
bailed into the accommodation and/or support services provided by ClearSprings.
The bail accommodation provided by ClearSprings is aimed at lower risk defendants. Where
suitable alternative accommodation is not available to a defendant who poses a medium or
higher risk consideration may be given to a place in Approved Premises as an alternative to
remand in custody.
Referral To Approved Premises
Approved premises (previously known as probation hostels) provide an enhanced level of

residential supervision for:
• defendants on bail in criminal proceedings

• offenders serving community sentences with a condition of residence
• offenders released from prison on licence
The core purpose of approved premises is to protect the public from offenders who pose
a significant risk of harm. For this reason, the majority of bed spaces are occupied by
offenders released from custody, some of whom have been convicted of very serious
offences. Often offenders are placed in approved premises as part of a risk management
plan devised under the auspices of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
(MAPPA See Page 59). Some approved premises may have some restrictions on the
categories of residents who may be accommodated. Local probation staff will be able to
advise where such restrictions apply.
In terms of bail referrals, priority is given to:
• Convicted offenders assessed as high or very high risk of harm, where the placement is
necessary in the interests of public protection and/or for a period of bail assessment to
assess their suitability for a condition of residence at the premises as part of a Community
Order
• Unconvicted defendants assessed as medium, high or very high risk of harm where the
placement is necessary for public protection reasons and/or to enable specialist
assessments (e.g. psychiatric or psychological assessments) to be undertaken

Chapter 1 - Bail
In order to avoid ‘bed blocking’ the normal expectation is that bail placements will be for a
period of not more than six weeks, or two adjournments; this is usually sufficient time for the
necessary assessments to be completed or for the court to be provided with a new, verified
address for the remainder of the bail period.
Approved premises operate to a national occupancy target of 90 per cent. This means it is
not possible to hold vacant beds on the chance there may be a referral from the courts. Staff
in approved premises are able to advise the court of vacancies on a daily basis.
In order to determine the suitability of a referral, a full assessment of risk and needs is
always undertaken, based on information made available from the court. The decision
to accept or reject a referral depends on this risk and needs assessment. Reasons for
refusal are made clear to the court at the earliest opportunity by probation staff. Difficulty in
obtaining full information can cause delays but, whenever possible, the decision should be
made on the same day.
The general principle applied to admissions is that the offender/defendant must require an
enhanced level of supervision, management and oversight; the need for accommodation
alone will not suffice.
Enhanced supervision
Approved premises provide enhanced supervision of offenders in the interests of public

protection. Typically this includes:
• Internal and external security measures such as CCTV, alarm systems, room searches
and facilities for electronic monitoring
• A minimum of two members of supervisory staff on duty at all times, including during the
night
• A standard curfew from 11.00pm-6.00am, which, in the case of bailees, can be extended
by the court
• Delivery of a core regime that is motivational and includes individual and/or groupwork
sessions
• Routine observation and assessment of residents’ behaviour
• Safe systems for issuing essential medication
• Access, on site or in the community, to drug and alcohol services, education, training and
employment (ETE) resources, relevant accredited programmes, mental health services,
multi-cultural/multi-faith links
Additional conditions
Sometimes additional bail conditions will be requested to assist in the safe management of
the person bailed. These could include:
• Not to contact named people (e.g. victims or known criminal associates)

• Additional curfews at certain times of the day
• Not to visit a named public area
Standard rules
All residents must read and sign the approved premises rules. This is important in securing

Chapter 1 - Bail
compliance and is vital to enable proper enforcement if a breach occurs. The rules cover
areas such as:
• Required standards of behaviour

• Prohibitions on alcohol and drug use
• Payment of rent
• Participation in chores and other activities
• Access for visitors
Breach and enforcement
Approved premises have systems in place to ensure the court is informed immediately when
defendants do not arrive or abscond from the placement. Minor breaches of the rules may
be dealt with by formal warnings; serious or persistent breaches will result in the defendant
being returned to court.
Suitable Wording
When a bail place is available in approved premises, the appropriate wording for a condition
is:
To reside at (name and address of approved premises) and to abide by the financial and
disciplinary rules of that approved premises.

Chapter 2 - Pre-Sentence Reports
PRE-SENTENCE REPORTS
Statutory Background
Under Section 158 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 a pre-sentence report (PSR) is a report
which:
a) with a view to assisting the court in determining the most suitable method of dealing with
an offender, is made or submitted by an appropriate officer, and
b) contains information as to such matters, presented in such manner as may be prescribed

by rules made by the Secretary of State.
Purpose of a PSR
The purpose of a PSR is to provide information to the sentencing court about the offender
and the offence committed and to help the court decide on a suitable sentence. Typically
the production of a PSR involves interviewing the offender, reading court papers, and an
assessment of likelihood of reconviction and risk, which may include use of the Offender
Assessment System (OASys – see Appendix 1).
When to Seek a Report
If a report is requested by the court the Probation Service is under a statutory duty to
provide one.
There are a number of circumstances under which a PSR might not be necessary. These
include cases in which:
• an offender has recently been sentenced, with a PSR, for a similar offence and the sentencer
decides on advice from the Probation Service that the existing PSR can be re-used
• an offender is held in custody, having been convicted of murder, and a post-sentence report
will be prepared instead of a PSR because the offender is to be sentenced to a mandatory
life sentence
• a custodial sentence is being considered by the court and the sentencer is clear that the
issue is merely one of sentence length and that he or she needs no Probation Service
assistance in deciding this
• the court is sentencing to a Community Order with a single Requirement, the offence is in
the low range of seriousness, and the National Probation Service will not be involved in the
delivery of the sentence.
• where the sentencer is minded to impose a fine only.
Type of Report
There is more than one type of report available to sentencers and these are outlined below.
Also outlined are the time periods in which sentencers should generally expect these reports
to be delivered.

• on the day requested or within five working days for Fast Delivery PSRs
• within 15 working days for Standard Delivery PSRs where the offender is
remanded on bail
• within 10-15 working days for Standard Delivery PSRs where the offender is
remanded in custody
• within the timescale set by the commissioning court for Crown Court cases
It should be noted, however, that some local variation is permissible subject to agreement
with the Regional Offender Manager (ROM) and Local Criminal Justice Board.
Sentencers should always check arrangements that have been made locally. Visiting
Recorders should note that PSR practice may differ slightly from area to area and should
ensure they are briefed on this.
Oral Advice
Probation officers may be able to offer oral advice where the court only wants a limited amount
of information. In these cases the sentencer might ask the probation officer for an oral report
rather than a written PSR.
PSRs
There are two national PSR templates available:
The Fast Delivery PSR – normally to be completed on the same day or for the next
working day. Completed using the OASys risk of serious
harm screening tool but usually without a full OASys
assessment
The Standard Delivery PSR – for completion on adjournment based on a full OASys
Assessment
Where a custodial sentence is being considered by the court a Standard Delivery PSR including
a full OASys assessment would normally be appropriate. There may be some straightforward
custodial cases that do not require this level of analysis, and where a Fast Delivery PSR
would be appropriate.
For cases in which the court has indicated that it is considering passing a Community Order
and requires a PSR, the court’s direction on seriousness will provide the initial trigger for the
type of PSR to be used. In most low seriousness cases, and in a significant number of medium
seriousness cases, a Fast Delivery PSR would be used whilst in most high seriousness cases
a Standard Delivery PSR would be used, but this would be dependent on the information the
court requires, the court’s intended purpose/s of sentencing and the outcome of the report
writer’s initial assessment.
Content of a PSR
Every PSR should be:
• Objective, impartial, free from discriminatory language and stereotype, balanced,

verified and factually accurate

• Completed following a risk of harm screening and a likelihood of reconviction

assessment and/or be based on a full OASys assessment
• Based on at least one interview with the offender
Every court report should include:
• A front sheet providing basic facts about the offender and the sources used to prepare
the report
• An offence analysis
• An assessment of the offender
• An assessment of the risk of harm to the public and the likelihood of re-offending
• A sentencing proposal
Sentencing Proposal
In all PSRs report writers must make a sentencing proposal.
In many cases the PSR sentencing proposal, following assessment of the offender and
his offending, will concur with the court’s provisional view. The report writer’s sentencing
proposal will be consistent with the court’s direction of seriousness and sentencing
purpose(s) and the OASys assessment.
However, there will also be cases in which the PSR proposal recommends a different
sentence from the one the court initially had in mind. In line with the SGC Guideline
which states that sentencers should consider all sentences available, whether within or
below the threshold passed, the report writer, after assessing the offender and his or her
circumstances, may recommend that a fine or discharge should be considered rather than a
Community Order, or a Community Order imposed rather than a custodial sentence.

Chapter 3 - The Community
Chapter
Order
3
THE COMMUNITY ORDER

Background
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduces a new Community Order which replaces all
existing community sentences for adults. It applies to offences committed on or after 4 April
2005. Offences committed before 4 April will be sentenced under the old legislation.
The Sentencing Guidelines Council says that when deciding whether to impose a
Community Order:
“Sentencers must consider all of the disposals available (within or below the threshold
passed) at the time of sentence…so that even where the threshold for a community
sentence has been passed a financial penalty or discharge may still be an appropriate
penalty. Where an offender has low risk of re-offending, particular care needs to be taken
in the light of evidence that indicates that there are circumstances where inappropriate
intervention can increase the risk of re-offending rather than decrease it. In addition, recent
improvements in enforcement of financial penalties make them a more viable sentence in a
wider range of cases.”
The content of the order is defined by one or more of 12 possible Requirements specified
within them. All Community Orders consist of at least one Requirement. (The same menu
of Requirements is available for the Community Order and the new Suspended Sentence
Order or ‘Custody Minus’.
Requirements can be combined to produce an individual package for each offender,

subject to the overall restriction on liberty being commensurate with the seriousness of the
offending, and the suitability for the offender. The seriousness of the offending is defined
according to the current offence(s) and any relevant previous convictions which the court
may take into account. The different Requirements ordered must also be compatible, and
not interfere with the offender’s religious beliefs or times of work and education.
The SGC has identified three sentencing ranges (low, medium and high) within the
community sentence band. It suggests that the low range is for offences only just crossing
the community sentence threshold, the medium range is for offences that obviously fall
within the community sentence band, and the high range is for offences that only just fall
below the custody threshold or where the custody threshold is crossed but a community
sentence is more appropriate in all the circumstances.
According to the SGC Guideline, “In most cases [of low seriousness], only one Requirement
will be appropriate and the length may be curtailed if additional Requirements are
necessary.” For high seriousness cases the SGC Guideline states that “more intensive
sentences which combine two or more Requirements may be appropriate”.
When adjourning for a report, the SGC guideline says that the court will indicate which of
the three sentencing ranges within the Community Order is relevant and the purpose(s) of
sentencing that the Requirements are required to fulfill. The guidelines state that usually
the most helpful way for the court to do this would be to produce a written note for the report
writer, copied on the court file. This information will be the starting point for the Probation
Service to make a recommendation to the court in the appropriate report format. The
content of this recommendation will be determined by the seriousness of the offence, risk of

The Community
Order Order
harm, likelihood of re-offending, and the particular offending related needs of the offender.
The 12 Requirements
The Requirements available for use in a Community Order are:

• Unpaid work
• Activity
• (Accredited) Programme
• Prohibited Activity
• Curfew
• Exclusion
• Residence
• Mental health treatment
• Drug rehabilitation
• Alcohol treatment
• Supervision
• Attendance Centre
Probation staff have been trained in the application of an “Implementation Model” that
helps them arrive at a suitable recommendation based on seriousness, purpose(s) and an
assessment of risks and needs.
All Requirements start from the sentence date, but implementation may be sequenced by
the Probation Service in accordance with probation National Standards (see Appendix 4).
The PSR writer will make a decision on sequencing and advise the court. The decision
will be based on the offender’s needs (e.g. the offender may require detox before his or
her offending��
behaviour��
can be addressed via a Programme Requirement) and resource
issues (e.g. the point at which a place on a programme can be made available). For multiple
Requirement orders the court can specify a shorter completion time for one Requirement
than another, but otherwise all Requirements are considered to terminate at the end of the
order
Judges should be aware that if a Community Order is made specifying an overall duration
for the Order, and this overall duration is greater than the longest community Requirement
within the Order, the following circumstances apply. The resulting gap (where no
Requirement is in force) cannot be considered an “at risk” period during which the offender
can be breached for re-offending. Similarly the offender will not be supervised during the
period where no Requirement is in force, regardless of the overall length of the Order.
The Probation Service will recommend that separate Requirements be used to deliver each
component of an order. For example, the delivery of basic skills and education is likely to be
proposed as a separate Activity Requirement and the delivery of an accredited substance
misuse programme will be proposed as a Programme Requirement (and not within a
parallel Alcohol Treatment or Drug Rehabilitation Requirement). This ensures that:
• the offender is clear about the expectations placed upon him or her
• the court is clear about the full extent of the level of intervention to be delivered
• the intentions of the court can be clearly enforced
• the use of specific resources is recorded and the demand for such provision monitored.
The exception to this is that a small amount of skills assessment or learning may be
10
Chapter 3 - The Community Order
undertaken within an Unpaid Work Requirement within the limits set by probation National
Standards.
The following descriptions of the 12 Requirements include suggestions for

duration at the different seriousness levels. This is the Probation Service
interpretation of what could be included and is based, where available,
on the SGC Guidelines. The descriptions also include suggested main
purposes. Courts are, of course, free to make their own assessments on a
case by case basis.
11
The Community
Order Order
Unpaid Work (UW)

Main purposes: Punishment + Reparation + Rehabilitation
Seriousness levels: Low = 40 – 80 hours
Medium = 80 – 150 hours
High = 150 – 300 hours
(based on SGC Guideline)
How is it expressed? In hours between 40 and 300
Further information re- The court must be satisfied that the offender is
quired? suitable to perform work.
The Requirement must be completed within one year unless extended on amendment by
the court on the application of the responsible officer.
For multiple offences dealt with on the same occasion, the hours can be concurrent or
consecutive subject to a maximum of 300. The increase in the maximum number of hours
brings England and Wales in line with existing legislation in Scotland.
Because courts will no longer have the option to take no action in the event of a breach of a
Community or Suspended Sentence Order, one course of action in making the order more
onerous will be the imposition of hours of Unpaid Work. Where this is an extension of an
existing UW Requirement then there is no minimum number of hours which may be added,
but the total on aggregate must not exceed 300 hours. Where no Unpaid Work Requirement
is in existence, the court can add one in the event of breach, but the Requirement will be
subject to the same 40 hours minimum as at the time of sentence.
At present Guided Skills Learning (where delivered) is done within the ordered hours since
most of the learning takes place while carrying out the work. Probation officers have been
advised by the Home Office that, where identified as a need, either at the time of OASys
assessment or subsequently during the post-sentence Unpaid Work assessment process,
a small amount of skills-related activity, such as basic skills, could be incorporated into
the Requirement. However, where any significant amount of skills learning is necessary,
an Activity Requirement might helpfully be included in the order, to permit the offender to
undertake up to 60 days of assessment and training in ETE (Employment, Training and
Education), with related support and advice. In this instance, consideration might be given to
reducing the number of Unpaid Work hours ordered, so as to ensure that the order remains
commensurate with the seriousness of the offending.
12
Chapter
Order
3
Activity
Main purposes: Rehabilitation + Reparation
Seriousness levels: Medium – 20 to 30 days

High – up to the maximum 60 days
How is it expressed? In days, up to a maximum of 60. In proposals
to courts, length will be expressed in days, but
also give details of the actual period and con-
tent of each attendance (e.g. an Activity Re-
quirement of 30 days, attending a basic skills
assessment and training programme at [venue]
for three hours once a week).
Further information required? An Activity Requirement cannot be made with-
out the consent of any person whose co-opera-
tion is necessary for the offender to comply with
the Requirement. The consent of the offender
is not necessary. The court must also be satis-
fied that compliance is feasible.
In an Activity Requirement the offender must present himself to a person or persons

specified at a place or places specified, and/or participate in activities specified, as
instructed by the responsible officer. In practice each attendance on a separate date will
count as one ‘day’ for the purposes of the number of days completed (but multiple attending
on the same date will count as one ‘day’).
The places specified must be a community rehabilitation centre or a place approved by

the Local Probation Board as providing suitable facilities for an Activity Requirement. The
offender can also be required to attend and participate in activities elsewhere under the
instruction or authority of the person in charge of a community rehabilitation centre.
An Activity Requirement can be used for a wide range of activities, from day centre
attendance to education and reparation to victims or persons affected by the offending.
Potential activities include:
• Employment, Training and Education – e.g. provided through a local college

• Counselling in debt and financial management – e.g. provided through a local
Citizens’ Advice Bureau
• Mediation between the offender and the victim or persons affected by the offending, if
a thorough risk assessment indicates that this would be appropriate.
Where a specialised assessment is required to determine the precise programme of

work to be undertaken by the offender, this can be provided and undertaken within the
arrangements for the delivery of the Activity Requirement. The NPS can advise the court on
a case by case basis.
Where the development of Employment, Training and Education interventions is identified

as being strongly linked to the prospects of reducing further offending, an Activity
Requirement could be included in the order, to permit the offender to undertake appropriate
13
The Community
Order Order
assessment and training, and receive related support and advice. This may be usefully
coupled with an Unpaid Work Requirement where the main purpose of the order is
punishment, as outlined in the section on Unpaid Work. It is anticipated that a major use of
Activity Requirements will be for the delivery of education and basic skills assessment and
training.
Where a period of mentoring (by a person other than the responsible officer) is to form a
specific part of a complex rehabilitation package of intervention, as distinct from contact
under a Supervision Requirement which has a more general focus and runs throughout the
order, an Activity Requirement could be used for this purpose.
14
Chapter
Order
3
Programme
Main purpose: Rehabilitation
Seriousness levels: Medium – High
(likely NPS recommendation)
How is it expressed? Normally in terms of the number of sessions.
Where possible the court will be advised of the
length and number of sessions per week and
the overall duration (e.g. two sessions of three
hours per week for 11 weeks)
Further Information required? The court cannot include a programme in
an order unless the PSR recommends it as
suitable for the offender and available.
A programme will normally be combined with a Supervision Requirement to provide

additional support.
The programme must be accredited by the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel, and
the wording of Programme Requirements must specify the title of the programme, the venue
and, if appropriate, the number of sessions.
Most offending behaviour programmes are accredited on the basis that pre and post
programme work is undertaken. However, this is often individual work, and does not form
a part of the main programme of sessions. This will ideally be undertaken within a parallel
Supervision Requirement which would normally be proposed for inclusion in the order.
Multiple Programme Requirements
These can be made by inserting a separate Requirement for each programme into the
order, for example, a Requirement for a General Offending Behaviour Programme (GOBP)
followed by an offence-specific programme. However, where offenders are unable to
undertake a second Programme Requirement, perhaps because they have failed to
complete a first GOBP, it will be necessary for the order to be amended and the second
Requirement deleted. For this reason sentencers may wish to consider whether multiple
Programme Requirements should be considered only in exceptional circumstances.
In all cases, where more than one Programme Requirement is proposed sentencers will
wish to ensure that the overall level of intervention is commensurate with the seriousness
of the offending, notwithstanding the level of offending-related needs which could be
successfully addressed.
For full details of accredited programmes, please refer to Page 58.
15
The Community
Order Order
Prohibited Activity
Main purposes: Punishment + Protection
Seriousness levels: Low – Medium – High
(low and medium range recommended by
SGC)
How is it expressed? To refrain from a specified activity on a day
or days, or during a period specified up to 36
months (24 months for a Suspended Sentence
Order)
Further information required? The court must consult the Probation Service
before making such a Requirement.
A Prohibited Activity Requirement proscribes a particular behaviour in contrast to an

Exclusion Requirement which proscribes presence at a particular place. A Prohibited
Activity Requirement may therefore be used to prohibit behaviour which could occur at a
wide range of places.
Examples of situations where a Prohibited Activity Requirement might be used include:
• Drink related offending linked to pubs in general – prohibition from entering any
public house or licensed premises
• Prohibition from association with named individual(s) (with whom the offender
might have committed offences)
• Stalking or sex offending – prohibition from approaching or communicating with
(victim and/or family members) without the approval of the case manager (and/
or local authority Social Services Department)
• Sex offender – prohibition from taking work or any other organised activity,
which will involve a person under the relevant age, either on a professional or
voluntary basis
• Sex offender – prohibition from approaching or communicating with any child
under the relevant age without the approval of the case manager (and/or LA
Social Services Department)
• Sex offender – prohibition from residing (or staying for even one night) in the
same household as any child under the relevant age.
The examples given above demonstrate the range of possible measures, particularly
in relation to inter-agency communication, which might be used to monitor compliance
with the prohibition. The Requirement should not be used to prohibit behaviour which is
illegal, but can be used to provide additional public protection. For example, prohibition of
a sex offender from staying the night in a house where there are children might only be
enforced in the breach, where the offender’s presence comes to the attention of the police,
but it would allow action to be taken even if no other offence had been committed on that
occasion.
Where appropriate, a Prohibited Activity can be used with a Supervision Requirement to

support and reinforce desired changes in behaviour.
16
Chapter
Order
3
Curfew
Main purposes: Punishment + Protection
Seriousness levels: Low = a few weeks
Medium = two – three months
High = four – six months
How is it expressed? Expressed in hours between two and 12 in
any one day, and limited to operate within six
months of the order being made. The curfew
can be at different places and/or for different
periods on different days.
Further information required? The court must consider information about the
place of curfew, including information about the
attitude of persons likely to be affected by the
enforced presence of the offender.
The Curfew Requirement must be electronically monitored unless this facility is not
available, ‘any necessary consent for monitoring has not been given’ or the court considers it
inappropriate.
A single Requirement of an electronically monitored Curfew can be used as a simple

punishment. Curfews may also be considered alongside a long Unpaid Work Requirement
in cases with a low level of offending-related need and risk of harm, but where the level of
seriousness is very high or above the custody threshold. Curfews can also be used as part
of a complex package of interventions in cases with high levels of offending-related need
and/or risk of harm and where the level of seriousness is very high or above the custody
threshold.
17
The Community
Order Order
Exclusion
Main purposes Punishment + Protection
Seriousness levels: Low = a few months
Medium = about six months
High = about 12 months
How is it expressed? Exclusion from a place or area for a specified
period up to two years. The exclusion can be
limited to particular specified periods, and at
different places for different periods or days
Further information required? Report is clearly advisable in cases where a
significant risk of harm is identified. Please
check with the Probation Service whether
electronic monitoring is available in your area.
An Exclusion Requirement precludes the offender’s presence from a particular place or

area. If the court’s intention is to prohibit behaviour which could occur at a range of places
too wide to define or to determine in advance, a Prohibited Activity Requirement may be
suitable, but may be harder to monitor and enforce.
Examples of situations where an Exclusion Requirement might be used include:
• Drink-related, public order or violent offences associated with particular public

house(s) – exclusion from named public houses
• Public order offences committed in particular area of town – exclusion from that
area
• Stalking – exclusion from area of victim’s home or workplace
• Sex offender excluded from named swimming pool, leisure centre, playground
etc or from (e.g.) a half-mile radius of named schools
• Burglary where a particular area or estate appears to have been targeted
– exclusion from that area
• Persistent shop theft – exclusion from a named store or shopping area
• Domestic violence cases – exclusion from the victim’s home and environs
The court is required to impose electronic monitoring unless this facility is not available,
any consent necessary for the monitoring has not been given, or the court considers it
inappropriate.
Exclusions can also be monitored where appropriate inter-agency communication is put in

place. For example, where a shopping centre is the subject of the exclusion, agencies will
have an interest in putting arrangements in place to ensure entry of the offender into the
place is detected and action is taken.
Where appropriate, an Exclusion Requirement can be used with a Supervision Requirement

to support and reinforce desired changes in behaviour.
18
Chapter
Order
3
Residence
Main purposes: Rehabilitation + Protection
How is it expressed? In months or years up to 36 months (max of 24
months for a Suspended Sentence Order)
Further information required? Residence in a hostel or institution must be
proposed by the Probation Service. The court
must consider the home surroundings of the
offender.
Residence can be at approved premises or a private address. Residence at an approved

hostel or other institution will normally be accompanied by a proposal for a Supervision
Requirement to ensure support and contact after moving to next-stage accommodation.
Residence at an approved hostel automatically includes a personally supervised curfew.
It is important to note the distinction between making a Residence Requirement at the

offender’s home, and the use of a Curfew Requirement. The former might be imposed
where the court wishes to ensure that the offender lives at a specific location (or with certain
other people) and not at an alternative address which for some reason would be unsuitable.
This Requirement does not require the offender to be at home at any particular time. If the
concern of the court is primarily to confine the offender to his or her residence at particular
times, then a Curfew Requirement would be more appropriate.
The order must specify the place of residence, but if so worded it may allow the offender
to reside at a place other than that specified in the order, with the prior approval of the
responsible officer.
19
The Community
Order Order
Mental Health Treatment

How is it expressed? In months or years between six and 36 months
(max of 24 months for a Suspended Sentence
Order)
Further information required? The court must be satisfied that:
• on the evidence of a registered medical
practitioner, the mental condition of
the offender is such as requires and
may be susceptible to treatment, but
does not warrant the making of a
Hospital or Guardianship Order
• treatment has been or can be arranged
• the offender is willing to comply with the
Requirement.
The offender is required to submit to treatment by or under the direction of a medical

practitioner and/or a chartered psychologist with a view to the improvement of the offender’s
mental condition. Treatment may be as a resident patient of a care home or hospital (but
not in hospital premises where ‘high security’ psychiatric services are provided), a non–
resident patient of such an institution, or under the direction of a medical practitioner and/or
a chartered psychologist. The offender will need to keep the appointments which have
been made in pursuance of the treatment by the medical specialist and to agree to take
any medication that is necessary. Should the medical specialist confirm that the offender
is not keeping to any necessary care plan for his or her mental health treatment, then the
responsible officer should take the offender back to court as being in breach of the Mental
Health Treatment Requirement within the order.
A Supervision Requirement will normally be proposed to provide additional support.

However, where treatment is residential then a Supervision Requirement would normally
not be necessary and the role of the responsible officer would be limited to that of case
manager. A separate Residence Requirement would also not be necessary
Full details of work with Mentally Disordered Offenders are contained in chapter 6.
20
Chapter
Order
3
Drug Rehabilitation
Seriousness levels: Low = six months
Medium = six – 12 months
High = 12 – 36 months (max of 24 months
for SSO)
How is it expressed? In months or years between six – 36 months
(max of 24 months for an SSO)
Further information required? The court cannot impose a Drug Rehabilitation
Requirement (DRR) unless the NPS has
recommended it as suitable for the offender.
The court must also be satisfied that:
• the offender is dependent on, or has
a propensity to misuse drugs, and that
this is susceptible to treatment
Requirement
Drug Rehabilitation includes testing, but sentencers may wish to consider whether the use
of an accredited substance misuse programme should be undertaken through a separate
Programme Requirement.
Progress reviews by the court are optional for Requirements of 12 months or less and
mandatory where over 12 months.
For cases at the low level of seriousness a single Requirement will usually be appropriate.
Therefore, where a DRR is necessary to address substance misuse then an additional,
supporting Supervision Requirement will not normally be necessary. In these instances, the
support required by the offender would be provided through the single DRR.
However, in cases at the medium or high level of seriousness, a DRR would normally be
combined with a proposal for a Supervision Requirement to support rehabilitation.
21
The Community
Order Order
Alcohol Treatment
Seriousness levels: Low = six months
Medium = six – 12 months
High = 12 – 36 months (max of 24 months
for SSO)
How is it expressed? In months or years between six – 36 months
(max of 24 months for SSO)
Further information required? The court must be satisfied that:
• the offender is dependent on alcohol,
requires, and may be susceptible to
treatment
Requirement.
The offender is required to submit to treatment by or under the direction of a specified

person having the necessary qualifications or experience with a view to the reduction or
elimination of the offender’s dependency on alcohol. Where attendance on an accredited
substance misuse or the Drink Impaired Drivers programme is necessary, this would be
specified in a separate Programme Requirement.
For cases at the low level of seriousness a single Requirement will usually be appropriate.
Where an Alcohol Treatment Requirement is necessary then an additional, supporting
Supervision Requirement will not normally be necessary. In these instances, all the
support required by the offender would be provided through the single Alcohol Treatment
Requirement.
However, in cases at the medium or high level of seriousness, an Alcohol Treatment would
normally be combined with a Supervision Requirement to support treatment.
22
Chapter
Order
3
Supervision
Seriousness levels: Low = up to 12 months

Medium = 12 – 18 months
High = 12 – 36 months (max of 24 months for
SSO)
How is it expressed? In months or years, and if included in an order
is always the same as the relevant period for
the order. That is:
• Community Order = the length of the
order
• Suspended Sentence Order = the
supervision period
Further information required? No specific information is required but there
should be a clear expectation between the
court and the offender about what work is to be
undertaken and what this will involve.
To enable the court to have regard to the overall restriction on liberty the Probation Service
will indicate initial frequency of contact.
The purpose of Supervision is more than contact to monitor and manage compliance with
any other Requirements. Supervision is defined in the Act as attending appointments with
the responsible officer, or another person determined by the responsible officer, to promote
the offender’s rehabilitation.
Typically Supervision can involve contact to:
• undertake work to promote personal and behavioural change

• monitor and review patterns of behaviour and personal activity
• undertake work to increase motivation and provide practical support to increase
compliance with other Requirements
• deliver pre and post programme work for accredited programmes
• support and reinforce learning being undertaken as part of a Programme or Activity
Requirement
• deliver individual counselling
• form and maintain working alliances to help support the offender through other
Requirements in the order
• model pro-social behaviour.
While normally the contact would be individual, the Act does not preclude carrying out these
activities within small informal groups if this is appropriate.
Orders with a single Supervision Requirement may be used in low seriousness cases to
provide a basic level of support and referral to other agencies for assistance with practical or
personal problems related to the person’s offending. However, for cases of medium or high
seriousness some combinations of Requirements are usefully supported by a Supervision
23
The Community
Order Order
Requirement. This support is particularly important when imposing a Programme

Requirement. The general principle of the Act is that specific interventions should be
itemised within the order and delivered within appropriate and separate Requirements.
For Community Orders the court must set the length of a Supervision Requirement to be at
least that of any other Requirement imposed, that is, to be the overall period for which the
order is in force. For Suspended Sentence Orders, the Supervision Requirement operates
for the same time as the Supervision Period. This automatically ensures that Supervision
will be available to provide the functions indicated above throughout the duration of
any other Requirement. However, in proposing the use of a Programme Requirement,
the Probation Service will also propose that the length of the order and any supporting
Supervision Requirement is long enough to extend beyond the likely completion date of the
programme.
24
Chapter
Order
3
Attendance Centre
Main purpose: Punishment
Seriousness level: Low
How is it expressed? In hours between 12 and 36, with a maximum
of three hours per attendance and one
attendance per day
Further information required? The court must be satisfied that a centre is
available and is accessible to the offender
Attendance Centre Requirement is only available for adults aged 18 to 24. Where an
Attendance Centre Requirement is the only Requirement in an order then the responsible
officer will be the officer in charge of the centre.
The centre must be specified in the order.
25
The Community
Order Order
Enforcement of Community Orders
Breach of Requirements
Warnings
The Act sets out the regime for warning and enforcement in the event of a failure to comply
with a Community or Suspended Sentence Order and this is reflected in probation National
Standards. The responsible officer has a duty to give a warning to the offender if he or she
considers that the offender has failed without reasonable excuse to comply with one or
more of the Requirements of the order. Alternatively, breach proceedings can be initiated
immediately in certain circumstances, and must be initiated if a warning has already been
previously given within the previous twelve months.
Community Orders
Following a breach of a Community Order the court must either:
• amend the order to make it more onerous, for example by adding a

Requirement (but not beyond the limits that apply to the Requirement
nor beyond the specified period of the order imposed. There is a maximum
three-year limit of a Community Order);
• revoke the order and re-sentence the offender as if he/she had just been convicted
• if the original offence was not punishable with imprisonment but the offender
has willfully and persistently failed to comply with the order, revoke the order
and sentence the offender to a custodial order.
The court is not able to:

• take no action
• issue a warning
• impose a fine
and allow the order to continue unamended
General considerations
If in dealing with a breach the court wishes to make a new Drug Rehabilitation, or Alcohol or
Mental Health Treatment Requirement the consent of the offender and the other limitations
on making these Requirements still apply.
Where the court wishes to deal with a breach by adding a further Requirement as a
punishment, the use of Unpaid Work may be appropriate. However, the court will be subject
to the same 40 hours minimum as at the time of the original sentence, and sentencers may
consider that in many cases this will represent too severe a penalty. In this situation a very
short curfew might be more commensurate with the seriousness of the breach.
Where a Community or Suspended Sentence Order already contains an Unpaid Work

Requirement there is no minimum number of hours which may be added, but the total on
aggregate must not exceed 300 hours.
If the court decides to revoke a Community Order and pass a new sentence, it must have
regard to the degree to which the offender has complied with the order and the extent to
which the Requirements have been completed.
26
In general, in re-sentencing for the original offence(s) the court will have regard to the
seriousness of the original offending. If the original offending was below the custody
threshold then a custodial sentence would not normally be imposed on breach of the order
since the court is constrained by the requirement to deal with the offence in any way which
was possible at the time the order was made. However, if the offender has wilfully and
persistently refused to comply with the Requirements of the order and is aged 18 or over
the court can impose a custodial sentence irrespective of the seriousness of the original
offence(s).
Reviews of Orders
Currently, reviews of orders are only available when imposing a Suspended Sentence Order
or a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR) as part of a Community Order.
At a review without a hearing the court considers a report submitted by the responsible
officer. Alternatively, the court can conduct the review at a review hearing, and in this case
the responsible officer submits a report to the court in advance and the offender is required
to attend the hearing.
If, at a review without a hearing, the court considers that the offender’s progress is
unsatisfactory, it may arrange a hearing and order the offender to attend. At that review
hearing the court may then amend the order so that subsequent reviews are made at a
review hearing, with or without the offender.
If, at a review hearing, the court considers the offender has without reasonable excuse
failed to comply with the order the court may adjourn the hearing for the purpose of dealing
with the offender under enforcement proceedings. A review or review hearing cannot be
used to deal with a breach of the order. The adjournment to a subsequent hearing allows
the offender to seek legal advice and representation.
If, on receipt of the responsible officer’s report prior to a review hearing, the court considers
that the offender’s progress is satisfactory the court may dispense with the review hearing. It
may also amend the order so that each subsequent review is held without a hearing.
The arrangements for reviews are not intended as an alternative for dealing with
enforcement. Any failure to comply with an order must be dealt with immediately through the
arrangements for breach of Requirements.
Reviews are optional for DRRs of up to a year and for Suspended Sentence Orders where
there is not a DRR. Reviews are mandatory where the DRR is longer than a year, and at
least the first review must be a review hearing. Reviews may be held at any interval of a
month of more. The report from the responsible officer must include drug testing results and
the views of the treatment provider as to the treatment and testing of the offender.
The court may amend the order in relation to the DRR providing:
• the Requirement is not reduced below the minimum length of six months
• the offender consents to the amendment
If the offender refuses to consent to the proposed amendment, the court may revoke the
order and deal with the offender in any way which was possible at the time the order was
made, including imposing a custodial sentence where the original offence was punishable
27
with imprisonment. When re-sentencing the court must take into account the extent to
which the offender has complied with the Requirements of the order.
The court can cancel (and if necessary, subsequently reinstate) the DRR for future review
hearings, but cannot cancel the future reviews themselves. However, the court could set a
lengthy interval between subsequent reviews.
Frequency and suitability for reviews
The statutory background for reviews is set out above, and within those limits courts are
free to provide for reviews and at whatever frequency they consider appropriate. However,
where the court intends to include reviews in an order the Probation Service would suggest
the following frequency for the hearings:
Orders with a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement:
• at four-weekly intervals for the first 16 weeks, then

• at 16-weekly intervals thereafter
Suspended Sentence Orders without a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement:
• at 16 weekly intervals.
Breach of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs)
There is a range of disposals available for those people who breach the conditions of their
ASBOs. These range from fines to the Community Order and custody. The maximum
sentence for breach of an ASBO is five years’ imprisonment for an adult.
If the court requests a PSR in cases where an ASBO has been breached, the sentencing
proposal given will be proportionate and reflect the impact of the anti-social behaviour.
PSRs and the assessment process will be conducted in the same way as they would for any
other criminal offence
28
Prolific and Priority Offenders (PPOs)
All probation and police areas in England and Wales are committed to the PPO strategy.
Its central aim is to reduce crime and re-offending by targeting the small group of offenders
who commit the most crime or create the maximum disorder.
Each PPO scheme is managed by the local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership
(CDRP) which ensures a joined-up approach by all local agencies involved, including police,
probation, prisons, Crown Prosecution Service, local authorities, courts service, drug action
teams and Jobcentre Plus.
Each local scheme identifies the individuals who are responsible for the most crime and
disorder. CDRPs ensure that all agencies prioritise their resources on these offenders, with
the explicit aim of putting an end to their offending.
The number of offenders involved in each CDRP area varies from a minimum of 15 to 20 to
between 60 and 100 in big cities such as Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
The PPO strategy has three strands:
Prevent and Deter - This aims to prevent young people from becoming offenders or
persistent offenders by a range of interventions aimed to divert them from criminal activity.
Catch and Convict - This is aimed at preventing PPOs from repeat offending through swift
apprehension and enforcement.
Rehabilitate and Resettle - This is aimed at the rehabilitation of PPOs who are in custody or
serving sentences in the community through closer working between all relevant agencies.
PPOs will be prioritised for interventions which aim to reduce their offending.
The strategy is seen as a coherent model, with the primary aim of moving offenders of all
ages away from committing further crime.
Pre-sentence Reports
Where appropriate, Probation will recommend Community Orders for offenders at risk
of receiving a short-term custodial sentence and specify their suitability for intensive
interventions.
Local communication with the courts is an important part of the scheme. Chief Officers
will work with the Local Criminal Justice Board to ensure that sentencers are aware of the
parameters and objectives of the PPO scheme.
29
Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring
ELECTRONIC MONITORING
Introduction
Electronic monitoring is a form of remote surveillance which is used to monitor a person’s

compliance with a range of requirements imposed by a court. The service is delivered by
the private sector under contract to the Ministry of Justice. Electronic monitoring has been
available throughout England and Wales since 1999. At any one time, about 15,000 people
are actively being monitored, making this the largest programme of its kind in the world
outside the USA.
Background
Electronic monitoring may be imposed either at the pre-trial stage or as a part of a

Community Order or Suspended Sentence Order. It is available for both adult and young
offenders, although some of the provisions differ.
(1) Pre-trial
s.3AA of the Bail Act 1976 and s.23AA of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 enable
the court to impose electronic monitoring on defendants aged 12–17 who are remanded on
bail or to local authority accommodation, if certain conditions are satisfied. These are that:
(a) the child or young person is charged with or convicted of a violent or sexual
offence, or an offence punishable by a sentence of imprisonment of 14 years or more;
and
(b) the current offence amounts or would amount to a recent history of repeatedly
committing imprisonable offences while remanded to bail or local authority
accommodation; and
(c) the court has been notified by the Secretary of State that electronic monitoring
arrangements are available in the relevant area, and is satisfied that the necessary
provision for dealing with the child or young person can be made under those
arrangements; and
(d) a youth offending team has told the court that it believes that an electronic monitoring
requirement will be suitable for that person.
The Bail Act 1976 was amended to make it clear when juveniles (under 17 year olds,
for these purposes) may be made subject to electronic monitoring, and provision to
electronically monitor 17 year olds on bail was rolled out nationally in January 2004. In
practice, this is normally in circumstances where the court would otherwise have remanded
the defendant into custody. The Government’s current intention is to legislate to restrict
the availability of tagging on bail for adults to those circumstances where the Court would
otherwise remand into custody. However, as noted in Chapter 1, it is now being widely used
for adults.
The Bail Act permits a court to grant bail with such conditions as appear to be necessary
to ensure that he or she surrenders to custody, does not commit an offence while on bail,
does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice, is available for
reports or enquiries, attends the next appointment with his or her legal representative, and
also for the defendant’s own protection or welfare. Courts should consider routinely whether
30
the possibility of imposing a curfew backed by electronic monitoring on a defendant has

any implications for their decision about whether or not it would be appropriate to grant bail
in a case where they were considering a custodial remand. The resources are available
for a greater use of tagging on bail should courts choose to use this option. It goes without
saying that this represents a more limited restriction of liberty than custody and it is also
significantly less expensive. Home Office Circular 25/2006 which sets out the procedures
to be followed by courts, the Electronic Monitoring suppliers and the police when the court
decides that a curfew is to be monitored electronically with a tag.
None of the provisions relating to electronic monitoring on bail specify any minimum or
maximum periods of time during which the electronic monitoring is to operate, although
typically they are 12 hours or less over night. Curfew times can be arranged to facilitate
employment or other commitments
None of the provisions relating to electronic monitoring on bail specify any minimum or
maximum periods of time during which the electronic monitoring is to operate.
(2) As a Requirement of a Community Order or Suspended Sentence Order
There are separate legal provisions for electronic monitoring as part of a community
sentence in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 and the Criminal Justice
Act 2003. The provisions in the 2000 Act apply where the offence was committed before 4
April 2005. The provisions in the 2003 Act apply where the offence was committed on or
after 4 April 2005.
s.36B of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 enables the court to include
electronic monitoring in a community sentence for the purpose of monitoring the offender’s
compliance with any other requirements imposed by the court. In practice, electronic
monitoring has been used in connection with a Curfew Order (s.37), an Exclusion Order
(s.40A), or a curfew requirement of a Community Rehabilitation Order (Schedule 2,
paragraph 7).
Certain conditions must be satisfied before the court can impose electronic monitoring:
(a) it has been notified by the Secretary of State that electronic monitoring arrangements
are available in the relevant area, and is satisfied that the necessary provision can be
made under those arrangements; and
(b) in relation to exclusion orders, if there is a person whose co-operation is necessary for
the electronic monitoring to be practicable, that person must have consented to the
imposition of electronic monitoring. (In practice, the Probation Service or youth
offending team will provide this information to the court.)
In respect of offences committed on or after 4 April 2005, s.215 and s.218 of the Criminal
Justice Act 2003 make the same provision as above except that the consent requirement at
(b) applies to the electronic monitoring of any Requirement and is not limited to Exclusion
Requirements. Under s.177 of the 2003 Act, there is a presumption of electronic monitoring
to monitor compliance with Curfew and Exclusion Requirements unless electronic
monitoring is not available in the relevant area, or if someone else whose consent is
required withholds it, or the court decides that electronic monitoring is inappropriate in the
particular case.
31
Availability of electronic monitoring arrangements
All court use of electronic monitoring is dependent upon a notification by the Secretary of
State that arrangements for electronic monitoring are available in the relevant area. For
Curfew Orders and Requirements with electronic monitoring, notification has been given in
respect of the whole of England and Wales.
For Exclusion Orders and Requirements with electronic monitoring, notification was given
only in respect of the areas of Greater Manchester, Hampshire and the West Midlands,
where satellite tracking technology was being piloted (see the section below on satellite
tracking). These arrangements were withdrawn at the end of June 2006.
Responsible officers
In respect of all court orders and Requirements with electronic monitoring, there must be a
person responsible for the monitoring, and that person must be of a description specified in
an order made by the Secretary of State.
With effect from 1 April 2005, the specified person is an employee of either Serco Home
Affairs (formerly Premier Monitoring Services Ltd) or Group4Securicor (formerly Securicor
Justice Services Ltd). From that date, these two companies provide electronic monitoring
services in five regions covering the whole of England and Wales. At the end of this chapter
is a list of the criminal justice areas covered by each company, and a map showing the
coverage.
These companies provide a complete service. They supply and install electronic monitoring
equipment, monitor those on the programme, follow up violations, and either return the
subject to court themselves or report the violation to another agency for enforcement action.
Rules for regulating electronic monitoring
The legislation enables the Secretary of State to make rules regulating the provision of
electronic monitoring. No such rules have yet been made. Instead, detailed requirements for
the provision of electronic monitoring are contained in the contracts awarded to each private
sector supplier.
The assessment process
The assessment of a person’s suitability for electronic monitoring is done by a probation

officer or youth offending team. In respect of curfews with electronic monitoring, this will
usually require a home visit to check the suitability of the premises and to check that other
family members are content for the person being curfewed to reside at the premises. The
curfew address must have an electricity supply connected to the mains. It must also support
the installation and use of a dedicated telephone line, or monitoring equipment incorporating
mobile phone technology.
Electronic monitoring equipment
Curfew Orders or Requirements
The equipment uses radio frequency transmissions. It consists of a transmitter, which is

usually worn round the ankle, and a receiver unit which is either connected to a landline
32
telephone or which incorporates mobile phone technology. The receiver unit communicates
with a central computer system at the contractor’s monitoring centre. The transmitter sends
signals to the receiver at regular intervals and these are sent on to the central computer.
The signal strength of the transmitter is calibrated to the receiver so that if the person being
monitored goes out of range (generally this means outside the building where the receiver is
located), there is a break in signal and this is also registered by the central computer which
generates follow-up action.
The transmitter can be removed only by breaking its strap. This interferes with the fibre-optic
circuitry inside the strap and is immediately registered as a tamper, also generating follow-
up action.
Voice verification to monitor attendance
Voice verification technology operates in a different way. The equipment registers the
voiceprint of the person being monitored and this is stored centrally. When the person is
supposed to be attending a programme or to be at a specified address, he or she can be
prompted to telephone the monitoring centre at random intervals and answer a number of
computer-generated questions. The voiceprint is checked against the record so that the
person’s identity can be confirmed or denied. In this way his or her attendance at school or
on a programme can be verified and timed with a record produced by the supplier for the
probation officer or youth offending team.
Satellite tracking
Satellite tracking technology was used between September 2004 and June 2006 to monitor
compliance with Exclusion Orders or Requirements imposed by a court. The technology
was piloted in three areas (Greater Manchester, Hampshire and West Midlands) with sex
offenders, violent offenders, prolific offenders and domestic violence offenders.
The offender was required to wear a portable tracking device which received signals from
a number of satellites and used these to calculate its location. The location data was
transmitted to a control centre either in real time or retrospectively. The pilots have now
ended and are being reviewed.
33
Serco Home Affairs Ltd

Group 4 Securicor
(Group 4 Securicor)
(Group 4 Securicor)
(Serco)
(Serco)
(Group 4 Securicor)
34
Allocation of Criminal Justice Areas to Electronic Monitoring Suppliers
Region Criminal Justice Areas Covered

North East and North Cheshire
West Cleveland
Cumbria
Group 4 Securicor Durham
Greater Manchester
Lancashire
Merseyside
Northumbria
East Midlands, Yorkshire Derbyshire
and Humberside Humberside
Leicestershire
Group 4 Securicor Lincolnshire
North Yorkshire
Northamptonshire
Nottinghamshire
South Yorkshire
West Yorkshire
West Midlands and Wales Dyfed-Powys
Gwent
Serco Home Affairs Ltd North Wales
South Wales
Staffordshire
Warwickshire
West Mercia
West Midlands
London and Eastern Bedfordshire
Cambridgeshire
Serco Home Affairs Ltd Essex
Hertfordshire
Metropolitan
Norfolk
Suffolk
South East and South Avon and Somerset
West Devon and Cornwall
Dorset
Group 4 Securicor Gloucestershire
Hampshire
Kent
Surrey
Sussex
Thames Valley
Wiltshire
35
Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences
CUSTODIAL SENTENCES
(Including Licence Arrangements)
Custody Plus
Custody Plus is not available. In its place, sentences of less than 12 months available under
the 1991 Act continue to be available to the courts. There is no probation supervision on
release.
Intermittent Custody
This sentence was been piloted but is now withdrawn.
The Suspended Sentence Order
The new Suspended Sentence Order is, in essence, a sentence of under 12 months’
custody, suspended for a period ranging from six months to two years, during which the
court must impose one or more Community Requirements from the same options as are
available for the Community Order (see chapter 3). The Probation Service will supervise
the offender in a similar way to the Community Order.
A breach will result in a return to court for all or part of the original custodial sentence to
be imposed or, in some cases, the Suspended Sentence Order to be continued but the
Requirements made more onerous. See the section on breach in chapter 3 page 26.
The Sentencing Guidelines Council says that “the presumption is that the suspended prison
sentence will be activated (either with its original custodial term or a lesser term) unless
the court takes the view that this would, in all circumstances, be unjust. In reaching that
decision, the court may take into account both the extent to which the offender has complied
with the Requirements and the facts of the new offence.”
The SGC also says that: “Because of the very clear deterrent threat involved in a
suspended sentence, Requirements imposed as part of that sentence should generally
be less onerous than those imposed as part of a community sentence. A court wishing to
impose onerous or intensive Requirements on an offender should reconsider its decision
to suspend sentence and consider whether a community sentence might be more
appropriate.”
Prison Sentences of 12 Months or Longer:
Sections 284 to 293 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provide for various increases in
maximum penalties for serious offences, in respect of certain drug-related offences; driving
and road traffic offences; firearms offences; and also for minimum mandatory sentences in
relation to firearms offences.
Standard Determinate Sentences
Background
These sentences replace the previous legislation relating to custodial sentences of 12
36
months or more. Under previous legislation, adult offenders sentenced to between one and
four years in custody were automatically released at the halfway point and supervised up
to the three-quarters point. Adult offenders sentenced to four years or more were released
between the halfway and the two-thirds point and supervised to the three-quarters point.
Offenders sentenced to 12 months or more under the new regime of the Criminal Justice
Act 2003 will be released from prison at the halfway point and will remain subject to post-
release supervision by the NPS under licence for the whole second half of the sentence.
Conditions may be added to the licence by the governor of the prison, on behalf of the
Secretary of State and on the advice of the NPS, and on occasion according to the
recommendations of the court.
The SGC guideline says that courts should only make specific recommendations about
the Requirements to be used on licence when announcing short sentences and where it is
reasonable to anticipate their relevance at point of release. The Governor and Probation
Service can review such recommendations in the light of changed circumstances.
Conditions of licence will last until the end of the sentence. Breach of these conditions
could result in the offender being returned to custody and this risk continues until the end
of sentence under the new legislation (under the previous legislation the offender was not
subject to conditions after the three-quarter point).
As a result of these changes the SGC Guideline says that “courts should consider reducing
the overall length of the sentence that would have been imposed under the current
provisions by in the region of 15%.”
The new determinate sentence, with automatic halfway release, applies to those offenders
who are not found by the court to meet the assessment of dangerousness as set out by
S.229 of the 2003 Act. For such offenders, new provisions apply and are described below.
Detention in a Young Offender Institution (DYOI)
Adult Young Offenders (18-20) receive DYOI sentences where older adults would receive
imprisonment. References to adult sentences of imprisonment can be read as DYOI or
detention for life in the case of persons aged 18 to 20.
Public Protection Sentences
There are two new sentences designed for offenders assessed as dangerous and who
present a significant risk to the public – an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for
public protection and the determinate extended sentence.
The NPS will identify cases where the offender is eligible for the consideration of a public
protection sentence, and prepare a Standard Delivery PSR for the court where required.
Where the NPS is asked to provide a PSR on an offender convicted of an offence in

Schedule 15 of the Act, it will help to inform the sentencer’s decision through the provision
of an assessment of risk of harm.
The PSR will identify and assess:
• the likely victim(s)
37
• the likelihood of any further offending

• the nature and seriousness of the potential impact of that offending
Extended Sentence for Public Protection (EPP)
The Parole Board’s decision to release the offender at the halfway point of the custodial part
of the sentence will be based on their assessment of the risks posed by the offender and
whether these are manageable in the community. The Parole Board’s decision is informed
by a report prepared by the NPS containing an up-to-date risk assessment and a risk
management and re-settlement plan.
The work undertaken in custody by prison and probation staff to reduce the risks presented
by offenders will be continued on release through the licence and any additional conditions
necessary to achieve successful re-settlement and risk management.
Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP)
The offender sentenced to an IPP will be managed in the same way as an individual
sentenced to a life sentence (see below). Where the minimum custodial term is relatively
short (as with the previous automatic life sentence) assessment and intervention need to be
undertaken in as timely a fashion as possible.
As with the life sentence, the Parole Board decide on whether to release the offender on the
basis of reports prepared for it by the NPS and HMPS. This will be based around a release
plan prepared by the NPS which sets out how it would manage the risks posed by the
offender if he/she were released into the community. It will also take into account the impact
on victims.
Just as he/she may be detained for an indeterminate period based on the risk he/she poses,
an offender sentenced to IPP will be subject to licence supervision by the NPS following
his/her release for as long as the Parole Board considers it to be necessary (see below
– Release on Licence). After 10 years the offender (or the NPS) may apply to the Parole
Board for the licence to be revoked. Again, the Parole Board’s decisions will be based on a
report prepared by the NPS.
Life sentences
The role of the NPS in relation to life sentence prisoners (lifers) begins wherever possible
pre-sentence and continues post-release to the suspension of the supervision element of
the licence (where appropriate).
The NPS maintains its own records about lifers often from the very beginning of the
process, opening a ‘home-life’ and enabling valuable information about victim issues and
the nature of the risks posed by the offender, which may later inform consideration of his/her
suitability for release, to be recorded. In particular, a pre-sentence report, where requested,
will incorporate an assessment of the offender’s risk of harm (including to self), risk of
reconviction and the factors or offending-related needs relevant to the offence.
Again before sentence, if the offence for which an individual has been convicted carries
the possibility of a life sentence, probation officers seconded to prisons contribute to the
initiation of a Life Sentence Plan (LSP) – a single document which follows a lifer throughout
his/her sentence. The LSP will contain all the necessary information about the offender and
38
his/her offence(s), the risks he/she poses and, in due course, sentence plan information,
records of his/her time in prison and the reports prepared by the NPS about his/her
suitability for release.
All of this information will prove useful post-sentence, when the NPS is required to allocate
the lifer to a ‘home’ probation officer, who must complete a Lifer Post-Sentence Report
(LPSR) within four months of the offender’s conviction. For mandatory lifers, the Prison
Service will convene a Multi-Agency Lifer Risk Assessment Panel (MALRAP) bringing
together the home probation officer, the investigating Police Officer and Prison Service staff.
The MALRAP receives information from all agencies and is used by the Prison Service to
complete the first part of the LSP. This includes a detailed account of the offence, a risk
assessment, and a note of the victim impact and other relevant issues. It is essential, due to
the potential length of custody, that such issues are recorded accurately and in detail.
The NPS plays an active role in planning for the lifer’s release, becoming more actively
involved at or shortly before the stage when he/she moves to open prison conditions.
Preparation for release will include:
• Referral to MAPPA (see below);

• Liaison with the Victim Liaison Officer;
• Prison visits;
• Preparation of release plans, including a home visit, an updated risk assessment,
setting objectives for supervision on release, and consideration of the need for non-
standard licence conditions.
After release, the lifer remains subject to licence conditions for his/her entire life; he/she
may be recalled to prison at any time. The supervision of lifers in the community demands
effective case management practice, which incorporates offence-focused work with the
offender. Although on release lifers do not pose a high risk, there are almost certainly
issues of disclosure to be considered, for example, in relation to employment and victims,
which would normally be considered within level one of MAPPA. In most instances, where
progress in reintegrating into the community has followed a normal pattern, the licensee
has complied with supervision and not committed an offence, the support of the Probation
Service is no longer needed, and there are no risk concerns to address, the supervising
officer can apply to the Lifer Review and Recall Section of the Home Office for permission
to dispense with regular supervision. Generally, supervision can be lifted after a period of
not less than four years; this period is normally longer for offenders convicted of sexual
offences.
39
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) are a set of statutory arrangements

operated by criminal justice and social care agencies. There is a duty on the police,
probation and prison service as the ‘responsible authority’ in each of the 42 Areas of
England and Wales to establish arrangements for the assessment and management of risk
posed by certain sexual and violent offenders.
MAPPA were introduced in April 2001. The responsible authority is required to review
and monitor the operation of the arrangements and publish an annual report about their
effectiveness. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduced a number of additional MAPPA
provisions. These included the imposition of a duty to co-operate with the responsible
authority on certain other agencies (e.g. local education authorities, youth offending
teams), the recruitment of lay advisers to the strategic board responsible for reviewing local
arrangements and the inclusion of the prison service in the responsible authority.
National MAPPA Guidance indicates the use of 3 levels of management:
Level 1: Involves ordinary agency management
Level 2: Referred to as local inter-agency management, where the active involvement

of more than one agency is required to manage the offender. Most offenders
assessed as high or very high risk of serious harm can be managed at Level 2
where the management plans do not require the attendance and commitment
of resources at a senior level.
Level 3: Level 3 activity meetings are known in all Areas as the Multi-Agency Public
Protection Panels (or MAPPPs). The few cases referred to MAPPPs are those
of offenders whose management is so problematic that multi-agency
co-operation and oversight at a senior level is required, together with the
authority to commit exceptional resources to stregnthen the risk management
plan.
Offenders will be managed under MAPPA if they fall into one of three categories as defined
by the Criminal Justice Act 2003:
1. Registered sex offenders are those offenders who are required by the nature
of their sexual offence and, in certain cases the severity of their sentence, to meet the
notification requirements set out in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. These notification
requirements include an expectation upon offenders to register their place of residence
within three days of their release from custody or any subsequent changes of address.
2. Violent and other sex offenders are generally those offenders who have
committed a violent offence (and certain sexual offences that do not require registration)
under schedule 15 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and who have received a sentence
of imprisonment of more than 12 months. However, the legislation is considerably more
complex than this and it also includes those detained under Hospital or Guardianship
Orders and those who have committed specific offences against children.
3. Other offenders are those offenders who do not qualify for MAPPA through either
40
of the first two categories but who are still considered to represent some risk of causing
serious harm by the agency that refers them. This risk of harm must relate in some way to
the offence that has brought them under consideration and must be considered to merit
active involvement by more than one agency (i.e. they can only be managed at levels 2 or
3).
41
Work With Victims
National Probation Service statutory duty

The National Probation Service’s work with victims was placed on a statutory footing
by Section 69 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000. This legislation was
repealed and replaced in Sections 35-44 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims
(DVCV) Act 2004, which replicated the current duty and extended it to the victims of
mentally disordered offenders in certain cases. The probation service’s duties apply to
victims of:

Offenders who are convicted of a sexual or violent offence:
1) and who receive a determinate custodial sentence of 12 months or more;

2) or who receive an indeterminate public protection sentence;
3) or who are then made the subject of a hospital order with a restriction order
Or those found unfit to plead and to have done the act and charged, or found not guilty by
reason of insanity under the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 as amended by the
DVCV Act 2004 in respect of a sexual or violent offence and then made subject to a hospital
order with restrictions;
1) or who are then made the subject of a hospital direction and limitation direction;
2) or who are transferred from prison to hospital under a transfer direction and restriction
direction.

Under the DVCV Act a victim is “a person who appears to the (probation) board to be the
victim of the offender or to act for the victim of the offence.” This includes the victim’s family
where the offence resulted in the victim’s death, or parents and carers of children who are
victims.

Where it is ascertained that a victim wishes to receive information, the Probation Service
must take all reasonable steps:
(a) to inform that person whether or not the offender is to be subject to any conditions or
requirements on his/ her release,

(b) if the offender is to be subject to any such conditions or requirements, to provide that
person with details of any conditions or requirements which relate to contact with
the victim
or his or her family, and

(c) to provide that person with such other information as is considered by that Local
Probation Board to be appropriate in all the circumstances of the case.

This duty reflects the growing priority attached to the role and rights of victims in the criminal
justice process and the work of the probation service.
How are victims traced and contacted?

Victim Liaison Officers are required to make an initial offer of contact to the victim within
42
eight weeks of the offender being sentenced. The victim may not want contact with the
Probation Service initially but is able to take up the offer of contact at any point during the
offender’s sentence.

Under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime, Witness Care Units will identify cases in
which the statutory duty applies and advise victims of their entitlement to receive services
from the probation service. Unless the victim declines contact, their details will be passed
to the probation service who will write to or telephone the victim offering him/her further
information about the service provided as well as a firm appointment to meet and discuss
the Victim Contact Scheme.
What information can victims receive?

When a victim accepts an offer to meet the contact officer, he/she is offered:

• A point of contact with the Probation Service through which he/she will be able to
express any concerns or anxieties about the offender

• General information about the custodial process for the offender and supervision after
release, including the likely timescales for considering release on licence or temporary
licence

• The opportunity of being contacted at key stages when the offender is in custody.
Such key stages may include an offender appealing against sentence, applying for
release on temporary licence, absconding from prison, and the outcome of a parole
review. Victims may also be informed if an offender, who is released on licence, is
recalled to custody.
• The opportunity to express views, via a written report from the Victim Liaison Officer,
on the offender’s conditions of release. (These arrangements may forbid contact with
the victim, members of his/her family or other named individuals, or may prevent the
offender entering a specified geographical area).
When are victims’ views sought?

Victims are not consulted on their views about whether an offender should be released.
Victim Liaison Officers consult the victim and offer an opportunity to make representations
about licence conditions.

In automatic conditional release cases, where the governor makes decisions about licence
conditions, the offender’s supervising officer will incorporate the victim’s views (obtained via
the Victim Liaison Officer) in the report to the governor.

In cases considered by the Parole Board, victims’ views about licence conditions may
be expressed via a written report which forms part of the parole dossier. This dossier is
disclosed to the prisoner, although the Victim Liaison Officer can apply to the governor for
non-disclosure of the victim’s views. The Parole Board requires all papers to be submitted in
the parole dossier prepared by the prison.

For offenders sentenced under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 Victim Liaison Officers will
continue to consult victims and offer them an opportunity to make representations about
licence conditions. This will be done by passing a written report to the Governor who sets
43
the licence conditions.
In addition, where an offender is recalled to custody, the victim will be consulted about
licence conditions again, prior to any subsequent decision to re-release the offender.

Through effective liaison with the responsible officer, victim contact staff are aware of likely
time-scales for parole or final release in any individual case, particularly in life sentence
cases. This enables them to anticipate the need to initiate contact with a victim and ensure
that, where appropriate, the information is made available to decision makers.
Victims of Young Offenders
Section 69 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 also places a duty on the
Probation Service to contact the victims of young offenders who have been sentenced to a
custodial period of 12 months or over for a sexual or violent offence.
This requires probation victim contact staff to liaise with Youth Offending Teams to obtain
information about the offender’s progress in custody and prior to release. Youth Offending
Teams also give victims an opportunity to become involved in restorative justice processes,
where it is deemed appropriate to the victim’s needs and wishes.
44
Chapter 6Disordered Offenders
Mentally Chapter 6 - Mentally Disordered Chapter
Offenders
6
MENTALLY DISORDERED OFFENDERS

Statutory Background
The principal legislation setting out how the criminal courts deal with mentally disordered
offenders is in part III of the Mental Health Act 1983. Key provisions are detailed below.
Provisions governing unfitness to plead and insanity are found in the Criminal Procedure
(Insanity) Act 1964 as amended by the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead)
Act 1991. The latter provisions have been further amended by the Domestic Violence,
Crime and Victims Act 2004. Full details of the amendments are given in Home Office
Circular 24/2005 issued in April 2005 which may be found on the Home Office website
(www.circulars.homeoffice.gov.uk) but the new Supervision Order is described in more detail
below. Provisions relating to the new Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment
Requirement are set out in sections 207-8 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, and are
described below.
The Mental Health Bill
The government has announced plans to introduce a Mental Health Bill to amend the
1983 Act. The Bill will preserve the main provisions of the current legislation, but will make
a number of changes. These include introducing a single definition of mental disorder
as opposed to the four categories that are currently in place; amending the criteria for
detention, and introducing supervised community treatment to ensure that unrestricted
patients continue with their treatment once they leave hospital.
More up-to-date information can be obtained from the Department of Health website, under
Mental Health, including briefing sheets on the new proposals.
Role of the Probation Service
The role of the Probation Service in relation to mentally disordered offenders is to provide
information to the court for the sentencing decision (see below), and to supervise offenders
in the community subject to Community Orders or on licence (see below). Where there is
local provision, the Probation Service will also provide information to the Crown Prosecution
Service in connection with bail information schemes. It may make referrals to approved
premises with defendants assessed as Medium, High or Very High risk of harm, where the
placement is necessary for public protection and/or to enable specialist assessments (e.g.
psychiatric or psychological assessments) to be undertaken.
Dealing with mentally disordered offenders
Mentally disordered offenders are not a homogeneous group, and range from those with
very low levels of disorder to those requiring long-term high security treatment regimes.
The Mental Health Act 1983 classifies mental disorder into four categories:
• mental illness
• mental impairment
• severe mental impairment
• psychopathic disorder
45 45 45
Mentally 6Disordered
Chapter - Mentally Offenders
Disordered Offenders Mentally Disordered Chapter
Offenders
6
These legal classifications are not diagnoses. Most legislation refers to the requirement
for offenders to be suffering from ‘mental disorder’ (or one or more of the four categories)
before the legislation applies. For all legislation the mental disorder must be confirmed by a
doctor approved under Sect.12(2) Mental Health Act 1983 as having special experience in
the diagnosis or treatment of mental disorder.
It is important that the court has assistance in exploring the relationship between offence
and disorder and it can be useful to think of mental disorder in three sub-classifications:
• offenders who are ill and offend within the context of their illness, for example, patients
who fail to take their medication and whose symptoms return, precipitating an offence.
With this group one might assume that if the illness is treated, so is the offending
behaviour;
• offenders who become ill but who continue to offend when well and whose offending
behaviour needs to be addressed in addition to any treatment;
• offenders who are classified as personality disordered and for whom offending
behaviour is integral to their diagnosis.
General sentencing provisions
These are set out in part 12 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and there are specific
provisions for dealing with mentally disordered offenders.
By virtue of section 157, unless the court is of the opinion that it is unnecessary to do so, it
must obtain and consider a medical report before passing a custodial sentence (other than
one fixed by law) in any case where the offender is, or appears to be, mentally disordered.
Before passing a custodial sentence (other than one fixed by law) the court must consider
any information before it which relates to the offender’s mental condition, and must also
consider the likely effects of that sentence on the mental condition and on any treatments
that may be available for it. The new public protection sentences introduced by the Criminal
Justice Act 2003 are not sentences “fixed by law”.
Section 166 deals with mitigating sentences and makes clear that:
a) where there is relevant mitigation the court is not prevented from passing a community
sentence even where the offence(s) would normally have justified a custodial penalty;
and
b) nothing in the general provisions in Part 12 on imposing community or custodial

penalties and fixing fines should be taken as restricting the court from using any
power (whether under the Mental Health Act or otherwise) to deal with a
mentally disordered offender in the manner which it considers to be most appropriate
in all the circumstances.
Psychiatric reports to the court
Psychiatrists reporting to the court should be approved by the Secretary of State under
section 12 of the Mental Health Act 1983 by virtue of their special experience in the
diagnosis and treatment of mental disorder. Approval is not limited to consultants, nor to
psychiatrists; some GPs may be s.12 approved. The court will best be served if the report is
provided by a general or forensic psychiatrist.
46 46
Mentally Disordered Offenders Chapter 6 - Mentally Disordered Chapter
Offenders
6
It is always helpful if the court specifies what is required in any psychiatric report, for
example the existence of a mental disorder, the relationship between the disorder and
offending behaviour, any risk the offender poses to self or others and opinion on what
disposals would both address the offender’s disorder and reduce offending. If a custodial
sentence is being considered it would help if the court specifically asked the psychiatrist to
address the impact of a custodial sentence on the disorder and any available treatments.
If the offence is a specified violent or sexual offence which might attract one of the new
public protection sentences (see chapter 5), and the offender’s mental state is at issue, it
would be very useful if the court could consider requiring the psychiatric report to include an
assessment of the risk to members of the public of serious harm by the commission by the
offender of further such offences.
Clinical opinion is important in assisting the court in determining the sentence to be passed.
The Code of Practice to the Mental Health Act 1983 (DoH & Welsh Office 1999) states that
psychiatric reports should include:
• the data on which the report is based;

• how this relates to the opinion given;
• factors relating to presence of mental disorder that may affect the risk the offender
poses to himself/herself or others;
• factors relating to the presence of mental disorder that may affect the risk of re-
offending;
• where relevant, how the opinion may relate to any medical condition, defence or other
trial issues;
• if admission to hospital is recommended, what, if any, special treatment or security is
required and how this would be addressed;
• where no medical proposal is made, advice on management may be appropriate.
Commissioning Psychiatric Reports
Best results will generally be obtained from commissioning reports from the offender’s
catchment area services. This allows resources to be matched to proposals and ensures
delivery of the service is the responsibility of the reporting doctor. It is not uncommon, if the
defence is arranging for this report to be prepared out of catchment area, that difficulties
arise in attempting to realise the proposal.
Difficulties may also arise in commissioning reports as there is currently no clear guidance.
Funding is available for psychiatric reports in the Magistrates’ Courts (but not in the Crown
Court) and for remands on bail, the Probation Service will act as commissioning agents
for the psychiatric report on behalf of the court. For those in custody, including cases in
the Crown Court, the prison will be responsible for arranging the report. The NHS is now
responsible for health care centres in prisons, and arrangements will be in place to assess
and report on offenders remanded in custody. The court must send a clear instruction to the
prison that a report has been ordered.
Pre-Sentence Reports
For a mentally disordered offender the PSR should address the following:
Culpability:
How does the mental disorder bear upon the offender’s personal responsibility for his/her
conduct?
47 47
Disordered Offenders Chapter 6
Risk:
Does the disorder make further offending more likely?
Does the disorder increase any risk to self or others?
What can be done to minimise any risk identified?
Feasibility:
Does the disorder make it unlikely that the offender would be able to comply with the
Requirements of a Community Order?
What would be the implications of a custodial sentence?
Supervision:
What work would be undertaken in the course of a Community Order?
Is the offender able to participate in an accredited programme?
Would the psychiatric services be involved?
How would liaison with mental health services take place under the Care Programme
Approach?
Can the order be supervised to National Standards?
48 48
Offenders
6
Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment Requirement
For further detail, please see chapter 3.

Purpose

This is to allow the offender to be dealt with by way of a Community Order and provide
access to treatment where issues other than mental disorder contribute to offending but the
mental condition does not require a Hospital or Guardianship Order.

Pre-conditions

There is a need for written or oral evidence of one s.12 approved doctor (see above) that
the offender’s mental condition requires, and may be susceptible to treatment. A doctor
must also provide evidence that treatment is appropriate and available. The offence must
be serious enough for a Community Order. The offender must agree to comply with the
Requirement. A s.12 approved doctor’s evidence is required even when it is intended that
any treatment under this requirement is delivered by a chartered psychologist.

Limits

The Mental Health Treatment Requirement under the direction of a psychiatrist or chartered
psychologist, or both, may be for all or any part of the order as specified by the court up to
the maximum of three years. Treatment can be as an in-patient or out-patient and this must
be stated in the order. No further specific definition of the treatment should appear on the
order.

The Responsible Medical Officer agreeing to treat the offender should be named on the
order.
Ancillary
A Mental Health Treatment Requirement is likely to be appropriate in the medium to high

seriousness bands and PSR writers have been asked to recommend its use in conjunction
with a Supervision Requirement. It might also be proposed in a low seriousness case but
the court might equally be asked to consider imposing a Supervision Requirement alone, to
allow for a basic level of support and referral to other agencies for assistance with practical
or personal problems related to the person’s offending.
National Standards for the supervision of a Community Order apply and the order must be
enforced to these standards.
The Care Programme Approach (see page 51) applies, which should provide the framework
for co-ordination between the health and probation services.
The Community Order with the Treatment Requirement is likely to address “help and
change”. How this is to be achieved should be clear from the report available to the court.
Where a recommendation for a Community Order with a Treatment Requirement is being
considered, probation officers have been advised that the following questions should be
addressed:

• Is there a medical condition, which is susceptible to treatment?
49 49
• Is the offender able and prepared to comply with all the Requirements of the order?
• Is there a need for probation intervention, rather than just medical intervention? What
requirements are necessary to deliver this?
• Is the client’s offending related to his/her medical condition?
• Can probation intervention reduce the risks of such re-offending?
• Are systems in place for regular liaison between medical and probation staff?
• Is the restriction of liberty involved in such an order commensurate with the
seriousness of the offence?
• Is the offence(s) under consideration non-imprisonable? Is the community sentence
appropriate since failure to comply could result in a custodial sentence? What impact
would a custodial sentence have on the offender’s mental health condition or his/her
access to available treatments?
• Would failure to co-operate with psychiatric treatment increase the risk of
re-offending? Would it lead automatically to breach proceedings?
• Will the treatment be provided by the NHS? If not, which authority is financially
responsible?

Inappropriate Use of a Condition of Treatment

It is not appropriate for a psychiatrist to recommend to the court that a Community Order
could be made to ensure that an offender takes his/her medication. Medication is a
clinical treatment issue, and in mental health legislation safeguards exist to review the
appropriateness of treatment through Mental Health Review Tribunals. Attempts to enforce
the taking of medication through conditions in a Community Order may be seen as an
avoidance of these safeguards. Nor is it possible to breach an offender simply for failing to
take medication.

Breach of the Community Order

For full details, please see the section on enforcement in chapter 3.
Mentally disordered offenders are subject to the same breach regime as other offenders.
One of the options open to the court is to revoke the order and deal with the offender in
any way which would be available to it if the offender was appearing for sentence for that
offence for the first time, including imprisonment or relevant disposals under the Mental
Health Act 1983. When considering any breach of a mentally disordered offender subject
to community supervision by the Probation Service, the vulnerability and any risk posed
by offenders to themselves and/or others, together with the impact of breach action on
any available or potential treatments are key considerations, particularly when considering
imprisonment. In any case where offenders have refused to undergo treatment they should
not be treated as having breached the order simply by virtue of this refusal, if the court
considers that their refusal is reasonable in the circumstances.

The process of breach can be used positively to divert offenders away from the criminal
justice process, or at least, the penal system. If breach is unavoidable the court can
consider what is the least restrictive/damaging outcome to a potentially vulnerable offender,
consistent with the risk assessment.

Breach Reports

Where there are issues of mental disorder PSR breach reports should address the
following:
50 50
Offenders
6

• up-to-date assessment of risk

• capacity of the offender to undertake an accredited programme; how does the
disorder impact on this?
• likely impact on current or potential medical or psychological treatments available to

this offender

• if a custodial sentence is likely, the effect of dislocation from community services
including accommodation

• impact of possible outcomes in terms of increase/decrease of risk to self or others

• assessment of current mental state by any other mental health professionals involved

• whether or not further assessment is required at this stage and what assessment, why
and by whom
• possible alternatives to continued criminal justice/penal system involvement e.g.

Guardianship or Hospital Order Sect.37 (MHA ‘83) or civil admission to hospital Sect.3
(MHA 1983). If so, the probation officer must have consulted with the Community
Mental Health Team (CMHT) and, in the case of Guardianship, have made the
necessary referral to the local authority.

Diversion to Health Care
It remains the government’s policy to divert mentally disordered persons from the Criminal
Justice System (CJS) in cases where the public interest does not require their prosecution
and to find suitable non-penal disposals wherever appropriate. A number of services are
available in police stations and Magistrates’ Courts, to assess mentally disordered offenders
and advise on their diversion from the CJS. The purpose of this activity is to ensure
that such offenders receive appropriate care and treatment from health and social care
provision.
These projects are designed to ensure that an opportunity exists for early identification and
filtering of mentally disordered offenders out of the CJS and is aimed at those who have
committed minor offences. This diversion from the CJS is applicable at all points in the
court process and is not confined to pre-sentence activity. The court may use sections of
the Mental Health Act to dispose of the case, for example a Hospital or Guardianship Order.
Alternatively, the court may consider a less severe sentence, such as a fine or a discharge,
if this is combined with an admission to hospital under a civil section, for example, s.3 of
the Mental Health Act 1983. If the disorder does not meet the conditions for a Mental Health
Order, a Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment Requirement may be more
appropriate.

The Care Programme Approach (CPA)

For any disposal of the court that includes psychiatric or psychological treatment from the
specialist psychiatric services, the CPA will apply during community supervision.

It is intended to provide a framework for the delivery of care to all adults with mental health
51 51
problems in contact with mental health services, whether on discharge from hospital, in
residential care, in the community or in prison. The CPA intends to ensure the delivery
of appropriate levels of care to a patient and to minimise the risk that the patient will lose
contact with services.

CPA provides the framework for the management of mental health service users. The key
elements of CPA are:

• an assessment of health and social care needs and a risk assessment
• a written Care Plan which addresses those needs
• involvement of the service user in the drawing up of the Care Plan
• regular reviews and modifications to the Care Plan
• appointment of a mental health worker as Care Co-ordinator to keep in close touch
with the user and monitor care.

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)

Mentally disordered offenders subject to criminal justice orders or licences are subject
to MAPPA, dependent on the risk they pose, in the same manner as any other offender.
Patients subject to Hospital or Guardianship Orders, qualify for inclusion in MAPPA if they
have a history of sexual or violent offending.
52
Appendix 1 - Offender Assessment
Appendices
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Offender Assessment
OASys: What is it and what is it designed to do?
OASys is short for Offender Assessment System. It is a national system that was developed
jointly by the Probation Service and Prison Service and is now in use in its electronic version
in all 42 probation areas.
Courts will find that many PSRs they receive will have been written following an OASys
assessment. New guidance to the Probation Service on the court report framework that
operates under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 makes clear that OASys is the cornerstone of
probation’s work with offenders. However, an OASys assessment will not be completed at
pre-sentence stage in the more straightforward cases.
OASys enables the probation officer conducting the assessment to understand:
• the offender’s likelihood of reconviction (low, medium or high)

• the risk of harm he or she represents (low, medium, high or very high)
• and the factors that must be addressed, such as drug misuse, if the offender’s
criminality is to be tackled.
The sentence plan that will determine the way the offender will be managed after sentence
derives from OASys. The sentence plan and the OASys assessment will be reviewed and
updated periodically throughout the sentence.
Components of OASys
The main body of OASys consists of 12 sections which help probation staff to understand
the offender’s likelihood of reconviction and the so-called “criminogenic factors” which need
to be tackled.
The 12 sections are:
1) Offending information
2) Analysis of offences
3) Accommodation
4) Education, training and employability
5) Financial management and income
6) Relationships
7) Lifestyle and associates
8) Drug misuse
9) Alcohol misuse
10) Emotional well-being
11) Thinking and behaviour
12) Attitudes
Each of these carries a numerical weighting dependant upon the research evidence as to its
predictiveness of re-conviction. Completing all 12 sections will generate a numerical score
(though this will not be shared with the court). Also contributing to the overall assessment
53
Offender Assessment
is an optional self-assessment form which can be valuable in providing the offender’s

perspective on his or her criminal behaviour.
The OASys Data Evaluation and Analysis Team (ODEAT) conducts research on the
reliability and validity of OASys assessments. This includes analysis to determine how
strongly each section is associated with further offending and how well OASys predicts
future re-offending, of a violent and non-violent nature.
In more detail, the 12 sections cover the following ground:
The offending information section examines current and previous offences. Research
studies show that criminal history is the best predictor of future conviction. Current
offence(s) are further detailed in the analysis of offences section which helps to identify risk
of serious harm, risks to the individual and other risks.
The accommodation section looks at whether accommodation is available, the quality of

accommodation and whether its location encourages re-offending or creates a risk of harm.
Research demonstrates that offenders are generally less well educated and trained than
other groups in society. They are more likely to be unemployed, have a poor history of
employment and express a dislike of work. Lack of employment or skills could contribute to
the likelihood of re-offending. Conversely, stable employment would usually be considered a
protective factor in reducing the likelihood of re-offending. The education, training and
employability section indicates whether or not there are problems in this area.
The financial management and income section highlights any evidential link
between the inability to copy with financial difficulties and reconviction.
The relationships section assesses whether the offender’s satisfaction with relationships
and the stability of those relationships has a link to his or her offending behaviour. This
section also seeks evidence of domestic abuse, either as a perpetrator or victim.
The lifestyle and associates section examines aspects of the offender’s current
lifestyle. A clear link exists between how offenders spend their time, the people they mix with
and the likelihood of reconviction.
The drug misuse section identifies the extent and type of drug misuse and its effects on
an offender’s life. Research consistently links misuse of drugs with re-offending.
The next section considers whether alcohol misuse is a significant factor in previous or
current offending. This is often linked with risk of harm.
The emotional well-being section examines the extent to which emotional problems
interfere with the offender’s functioning or are associated with a risk of harm to self or
others. Mental health problems such as anxiety and depression relate to offending for
certain groups.
The thinking and behaviour section assesses the offender’s application of reasoning,
especially to social problems. Research indicates that offenders tend not to think things
through, plan, or consider the consequences of their behaviour and do not see things from
other people’s perspective. Those with a number of such cognitive deficits will be more likely
to re-offend.
54
Appendix 1
The attitudes section considers the offender’s attitude towards offending and supervision.
A growing body of research demonstrates that pro-criminal attitudes are predictive of
reconviction. Addressing attitudes can reduce the likelihood of reconviction.
A final health and other considerations section does not contribute to assessing risk
of reconviction or harm. However, assessors use this section when considering suitability for
community sentences (which may involve physical work), electronic monitoring and
programmes. This information will mainly be used by the Probation Service but also helps
the Prison Service determine suitable allocations to work and in sentence planning.
Additional Assessments
As the probation officer works through OASys he or she may be alerted to the need for
other assessments. These include:
Sex offender assessment

Violent offender assessment
Basic Skills assessment
Drug assessment
Alcohol assessment
Mental health assessment
Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder assessment
Domestic violence assessment
Analysis of the Risk of Harm, Risks to the Individual and Other Risks
OASys contains a comprehensive risk of serious harm analysis and assessment.

This includes:
• A screening section
• A full analysis section
• A harm summary section which includes a risk of harm management plan for use
when required.
The risk of serious harm sections draw together information from earlier sections of OASys
in a comprehensive and systematic way so that the assessor can make an informed
judgement on issues of risk and harm under various headings.
The following risks are addressed:
• Harm to the public

• To known adults
• To staff
• To prisoners
• To children
• To the individual (suicide, self-harm, coping in custody or hostel setting, vulnerability)
• Other risks (escape/abscond, control issues, breach of trust)
Levels of risk of serious harm used in OASys:
Low: no significant, current indicators of risk of serious harm
55
Appendices
Offender Assessment
Medium: identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. Potential to cause harm but
unlikely to do so unless there is a change in circumstances.
High: identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. Potential event could

happen at any time and impact would be serious.
Very High: imminent risk of serious harm. Potential event is more likely than not to
happen imminently. The impact would be serious.
A risk management plan will be drawn up for Medium level risk and above, appropriate
to the assessed level of risk of serious harm. The plan will link to other risk management
frameworks such as child protection procedures and the Multi-Agency Public Protection
Arrangements (MAPPA) that exist across the country. Under MAPPA, more than one agency
is likely to be actively involved with the Probation Service in managing the risk in High and
Very High risk of serious harm cases.
Supervision and Sentence Planning
This section is made up of:
• An outline plan, for use with pre-sentence reports

• An initial plan at the start of sentence
• A review plan, including transfer and termination
Integrating sentence planning into the overall assessment process enables practitioners to
draw together and manage information systematically and measure offender progress and
change throughout the sentence.
Through improved sentence plans OASys helps ensure that offenders receive the right
programmes and other interventions. Better targeting of interventions improves their
effectiveness and contributes to reduced re-offending and improved public protection.
56
56
Offender Management Appendix 2 - Offender Management
Appendix 2: Offender Management
Offender Management is a term introduced by the Correctional Services Review of 2003.

It refers to the universal underlying process of assessment, planning, implementation and
review which is expected to take place for all supervised offenders, whatever their sentence,
both in custody and in the community. OASys provides a consistent national format for
assessment, planning and review.
An Offender Manager is appointed for each offender, who, as far as possible, remains
responsible for that offender as he/she moves from one phase of a sentence to another,
or one sentence to another. Offender Managers are probation staff; in the main, Probation
Officers deal with the more complex, risky cases, while Probation Service Officers deal with
the remainder.
The Offender Manager is required to broker the specific interventions which satisfy
the requirements of the sentence, meet the needs of the offender as they relate to his/
her likelihood of re-offending, and attend to the risks posed. These may be punitive,
rehabilitative or restrictive in nature. The Offender Manager’s role is to motivate, secure
compliance, co-ordinate, integrate and, if necessary, enforce.
Four different approaches to this have been identified – called for simplicity PUNISH,
HELP, CHANGE and CONTROL – one of which is matched to each offender, and each of
which attracts different resource levels and requires different skills. While an offender is in
custody the day-to-day motivational and co-ordinating work is undertaken by an Offender
Supervisor, working to the plan prepared by the Offender Manager.
The different contributions by different staff are integrated through an explicit teamwork
approach, within which the Offender Manager acts as the team leader. This will, in due
course, be underpinned by a single electronic case record – accessible to probation staff,
prison staff and the providers of the main interventions, like drug treatment and unpaid work.
This is called C-NOMIS. The installation commenced in 2007, initially to prisons, and is
scheduled to complete in 2009.
Though a simple enough idea, Offender Management breaks with the tradition in which
different tasks (e.g. assessment, induction, enforcement) or different stages (e.g. pre-
sentence reporting, community supervision, custody) are dealt with by different staff or,
indeed, different organisations. It is offender-focussed rather than task-focussed, and well
grounded in evidence. It will take some time to implement completely. The first phase of
implementation covered community orders, from April 2005 onward; high risk custody cases
are the focus of the second phase, from November 2006 with the remaining custody cases
scheduled for 2007/8.
Further details of the NOMS Offender Management Model can be obtained from
the document of the same name at www.NOMS.homeoffice.gov.uk under Offender
Management/New Publications/Offender Management Model V 1.1
57
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Behaviour Programmes
Appendix 3: Offending Behaviour Programmes
Offending Behaviour Programmes, both groupwork and individual, are an integral part of the
work carried out by the National Probation Service (NPS). They are accredited by the Home
Office and run to strict National Standards.
Programmes fall into five categories:
- General offending
- Violence
- Sex offending
- Substance misuse
- Domestic violence
Programmes serve all of our aims:
To protect the public

To reduce re-offending
The proper punishment of offenders
To ensure offenders’ awareness of the effects of crime on victims and the public
The rehabilitation of offenders
The NPS offers a total of 15 programmes:
• Enhanced Thinking Skills

• Think First
• One to One
• Women’s Programme
• Aggression Replacement Training (ART)
• Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM)
• Community – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (C-SOGP)
• Thames-Valley – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (TV-SOGP)
• Northumbria – Sex Offender Group Programme (N-SOGP)
• Internet Sex Offender Programme
• Drink Impaired Drivers (DIDs)
• Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO)
• Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP)
• Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse (PRISM)
• Community Domestic Violence Programme (CDVP)
• Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP)

Details of all 15 programmes are given in this manual. To verify which programmes are
offered locally please refer to specific information provided by the local probation area.
Attendance on any of these programmes can be a Requirement of a Community Order.
When a court sentences an offender to attend a programme, the Requirement should read:
“To attend (programme name) as directed by the responsible officer and comply with the
rules of attendance of the programme.”
58
Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes
Appendix 3
The Accreditation Process
The Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (CSAP) is currently designated by Statutory

Instrument as the accrediting body for these purposes.
Programmes are an integral part of the National Offender Management Service’s strategy
to reduce re-offending. They are delivered to prisoners and those on licence as well as to
those subject to an accredited programme Requirement as part of a Community Order.
The CSAP is an advisory non-departmental public body which accredits interventions

(usually programmes) for delivery to offenders in custody or in the community.
Accreditation is awarded only when the CSAP is persuaded that the intervention has been
designed consistently with the evidence about what is likely to be effective in reducing
re-offending. This body of evidence is often referred to within the correctional services
and beyond, both in England and Wales and internationally, as “What Works”. The CSAP
considers interventions for accreditation by scoring applications against a set of criteria
drawn from the “What Works” evidence. An application to the CSAP for accreditation
consists of a submission addressing the accreditation criteria, together with a number of
separate manuals for use by practitioners detailing:
• the programme’s theoretical basis;

• its content and how it should be delivered;
• how it should be managed;
• the selection and training of tutors/facilitators;
• the assessment of offenders who might be suitable to undertake the programme and
evaluation of progress of those who do so.
The CSAP consists of eminent psychologists and criminologists from the UK, Germany,
Canada and the USA, with theoretical (often research-focused) and operational expertise in
various areas of offender treatment.
59
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Enhanced Thinking Skills
Programme aims:
• To change offenders’ thinking and behaviour, to reduce the likelihood of re-offending.
Who is suitable?
Offenders, both men and women, who:
• pose a medium to high risk of re-offending

• have poor problem-solving skills
• do not think through the consequences of their actions
• are assessed as suitable in a PSR
Who is not suitable?
• People whose offending is not linked to poor cognitive skills

• Offenders with serious mental health problems
• Offenders who cannot learn in a group setting
• Current sex offenders
• Domestic violence offenders who have not completed a domestic violence programme
The programme involves:
• 20 sessions lasting between two and two-and-a-half hours

• A sequenced series of structured exercises designed to teach inter-personal problem-
solving skills
60
Appendix 3
Think First
Programme aims:
• To teach problem-solving skills and apply these skills to offending behaviour, in order
to help offenders stop offending
Who is suitable?
• pose a medium to high risk of re-offending

• are impulsive and/or rigid thinkers
• fail to consider the effects of their behaviour on victims or others
• People whose offending is not linked to poor cognitive skills

• Domestic violence offenders
• Four pre-programme sessions, both one-to-one and in a group

• 22 group sessions of between two and two-and-a-half hours. These focus on skills
to change behaviour such as problem-solving, anti-social attitudes, tackling pressures
to offend, victim awareness, moral reasoning, self-management and social interaction.
These are then applied to aspects of offences and situations in which they occur.
• Seven post-programme sessions on an individual basis
61
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
One to One
Programme aims:
• To enable offenders to develop a range of problem-solving skills in order to change

behaviour and the underpinning thought, values and attitudes related to offending
Who is suitable?
Offenders who:
• pose a medium to medium high risk of re-offending

• have poor problem-solving skills
• are impulsive and/or rigid thinkers
• have personal circumstances or long and/or difficult journey times which would make
attendance at a group programme difficult
• have a complex pattern of personal problems and characteristics which would make it
difficult for them to learn in a group setting

• Offenders who would not meet the learning outcomes because of severe drug
dependency
• Offenders with learning difficulties where this inhibits understanding of the materials.
This does not necessarily include those with literacy difficulties
• One pre-programme motivational session

• 21 one-to-one programme sessions of between one and one-and-a-half hours. These
focus on skills to change behaviour such as problem solving, anti-social attitudes,
tackling pressures to offend, victim awareness, moral reasoning and self-awareness.
62
Appendix 3
Women’s Programme
Programme aims:
To help women to change their behaviour, to reduce the risk of re-offending
Who is suitable?
Women offenders:
• who have a current conviction for an offence of an acquisitive nature or

• where there is a pattern of previous offending motivated by financial gain or
• the current offence has an underlying motivation of an acquisitive nature
• who have poor problem-solving skills
• who do not think through the consequences of their actions
• who are assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR
• Women whose offending is not linked to poor cognitive skills

• Women with serious mental health problems
• Women who cannot learn in a group setting
• 31 sessions of two hours each. Additional work will be needed for the high risk women
or those with greater need. The programme is based on motivational interviewing
techniques with an emphasis on emotional management and building healthy
relationships.
63
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Aggression Replacement Training (ART)
Programme aims:
• To reduce aggressive behaviour through teaching social skills, anger management

techniques and improved moral reasoning
• Who is suitable?
• pose a medium to high risk of re-offending or medium to high risk of harm

• have a conviction for assault, a public order offence or criminal damage
• have a current aggressive offence and an established pattern of violent or aggressive
behaviour
• are assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR

• Offenders who primarily commit forms of instrumental violence such as robbery or
making threats to kill
• Offenders with learning difficulties
• People with mental health problems or suffering severe alcohol or drug abuse
• Five structured individual sessions on risk assessment and group preparation

• 18 groupwork sessions. These focus on reducing violent behaviour through teaching
social skills, anger management techniques and improved moral reasoning
• Five post-programme individual, structured evaluation and relapse prevention
sessions
64
Appendix 3
Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM)
Programme aims:
• To reduce aggressive and offending behaviour related to poor emotional management

through teaching social skills, emotional management and cognitive techniques
Who is suitable?
Male offenders who:
• pose a medium to high risk of re-offending or medium to high risk of harm

• have been convicted of any offence in which anger or other uncontrolled emotion has
played a significant part, or have a history of violent, aggressive or emotionally
uncontrolled behaviour
• have problems of emotional management especially anger management
• have been assessed as suitable in a PSR

• Offenders who primarily commit forms of instrumental violence such as robbery or
making threats to kill
• 24 groupwork sessions of between two and two-and-a-half hours. Offenders learn to

control their emotional arousal, they learn skills to resolve conflict, and learn how to
deal with relapse.
65
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Community - Sex Offender Group Programme (C-SOGP)
Programme aims:
• To reduce offending by adult male sex offenders
Who is suitable?
• Adult males within the normal IQ range who commit any type of sexual offence.
• Offenders who are assessed as suitable in a PSR
• Female sexual offenders

• Sex offenders with an IQ of less than 80
• Men with severe drug/alcohol misuse behaviour
• Men with current mental health problems
• Men assessed as psychopathic
• 50-hour induction module. Low risk/low deviancy men then go directly to a 50-hour
Relapse Prevention Programme
• High risk/high deviancy men undertake the full 250-hour programme consisting of six
modules. Men can join at the beginning of any module
• Men who have successfully completed a Prison sex offender treatment programme
can go directly to the Relapse Prevention Programme
66
Appendix 3
Thames Valley – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (TV-SOGP)
Programme aims:
• To reduce the risk of future sexual offending by adult male sex offenders
Who is suitable?
Male sex offenders who:
• are convicted of any sexual offence or sexually-motivated offence, including non-

contact sexual offences
• are aged 21 or over
• are within the normal IQ range
• are assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR

• Men in total denial of their sexual offending
• Assessment by psychometric measures for deviancy and to determine which blocks of

the programme need to be undertaken
• Structured pre-groupwork to build on an offender’s motivation to follow the programme
The four programme blocks are:
• Foundation - requires full-time attendance for two consecutive weeks

• Victim empathy - requires twice-weekly attendance for four weeks
• Life skills - requires twice-weekly attendance for 10 weeks
• Relapse prevention - requires weekly attendance for 24 weeks
• High risk/high deviancy men complete the whole programme. Low risk/low deviancy
men can miss out the Life Skills block.
• Men who have completed a Prison sex offender treatment programme can go directly
to the Relapse Prevention Programme
67
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Northumbria – Sex Offender Group Programme (N-SOGP)
Programme aims:
• To reduce sex offending by adult male sex offenders
Who is suitable?
Male sex offenders who:
• are within the normal IQ range

• commit any type of sexual offence

• Men in total denial of their sexual offending
• 160 hours of attendance consisting of sessions run for one or two days per week
• The core programme consists of four modules. Men can attend at the beginning of any
module
• High risk/high deviancy men will attend the core group followed by Relapse Prevention
(36 hours)
• Low risk/low deviancy men will normally complete individual preparation work followed
by the Relapse Prevention Programme
• Offenders released from prison will follow similar routes according to their assessment
of risk and deviancy
68
Appendix 3
Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme (i-SOTP)
Programme aims:
To reduce the risk of future internet sexual offending and risk of progression to contact
sexual offending.
Who is suitable?
The Programme is exclusively for internet-only offenders who are aged over 17 for the
one-to-one programme format and over 21 years for the groupwork programme. (The age
distinction is to minimise the risk of relatively younger offenders possibly being adversely
influenced by working in a group of more mature offenders).
Offenders should be in the normal IQ range (80 and over). Offenders will enter the
programme as a requirement of a Community Order (usually three years in duration) or as
a condition of release from prison. The programme is for low, medium and high-risk and low
deviance.
It is envisaged that if, in the course of the programme an offender’s treatment needs emerge
as greater than is apparent at the pre-sentence assessment, there would be the facility to
transfer offenders from the i-SOTP to one of the other accredited sex offender treatment
programmes.
Female sex offenders; men with previous convictions for other types of sexual offences;
very high risk/high deviance; men with severe drug/alcohol abuse; men with mental health
problems such as psycopathy, schizophrenia, acute depression; offenders who are unable
to speak English.
It is a cognitive behavioural treatment programme which has the following components:-
• Motivational work
• Functional analysis of offence behaviour
• Enhancing victim awareness
• Addressing cognitive distortions
• Relationship and intimacy skills
• Addressing problematic collecting and compulsivity
• Relapse prevention
The programme comprises six modules. The group format has 35 sessions of two hours’
duration; the one-to-one format has 20 to 30 sessions of 90 minutes (the number of
sessions is determined according to treatment need and individual pace). In both formats
sessions are supplemented by substantial homework assignments.
69
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Drink Impaired Drivers (DIDs)
Programme aims:
• To reduce the risk of future drink-related driving offences
Who is suitable?
Offenders, both men and women who:
• have up to four previous convictions of any kind

• are aged 17 and over
• have been assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR
• First-time offenders, unless there are aggravated circumstances

• Those with five or more previous convictions for excess alcohol
• Heavy drinkers unless sequenced with alcohol treatment
• Problem drinkers until they are stabilised
• Four individual structured sessions on risk assessment and group preparation

• 14 weekly groupwork sessions of two-and-a-half hours focused on structured learning
to develop pro-social skills, effective decision making and detailed knowledge about
the effects of drinking and driving
• Six post-programme individual, structured evaluation and relapse prevention sessions
70
Appendix 3
Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO)
Programme aims:
• To teach offenders the skills required to reduce or stop substance misuse
Who is suitable?
Offenders:
• who pose a medium to high risk of re-offending

• whose offending is related to at least one of the following:
- substance specific offences (e.g. possession of a Class A drug)
- use of drugs or alcohol as a disinhibitor
- offences committed as a result of addiction or perceived addiction to alcohol or
drugs
• who are sufficiently stable and motivated to change
• who are assessed as suitable in a PSR
Offenders:
• with serious mental health problems

• who cannot learn in a group setting
• who might be at risk if disclosing offences of a sensitive nature
• Three optional pre-programme sessions

• 20 sessions of two-and-a-half hours generally delivered twice a week
71
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP)
Programme aims:
• To raise awareness of the link between drug and/or alcohol misuse and offending
• To provide offenders with the skills to enable them to reduce or stop substance
misuse, thus reducing offending
Who is suitable?
Offenders:
• who have been assessed as medium to high risk of re-offending

• whose offending is linked to at least one of the following:
- substance specific offences (e.g. possession of a Class A drug)
- use of drugs or alcohol as a disinhibitor
- offences committed as a result of addiction or perceived addiction to alcohol or drugs
• who are sufficiently stable and motivated to change
• who are assessed as suitable in a PSR

• Three pre-programme sessions

• 26 groupwork sessions with a modular structure delivered up to four times a week
• At least four post-programme maintenance sessions with a case manager
72
Appendix 3
Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse (PRISM)
Programme aims:
• To enable offenders, in a one-to-one situation, to acquire the skills to reduce or stop

substance misuse, thus reducing offending
Who is suitable?
Offenders:
• who have a medium to high risk of re-offending

• whose offending is related to substance misuse
• who are sufficiently stable and motivated
• who would not benefit from, or who are not suitable for, a groupwork setting
• who have personal circumstances and/or needs that are better met by an individual
programme

• A pre-programme motivational interview

• 20 sessions from between 45 and 120 minutes. Recommended frequency is:
- twice weekly for sessions one to four
- weekly for sessions five to 12
- twice weekly or weekly for sessions 13 to 20
73
Offending
Appendix Behaviour
3 - Offending
Programmes
Community Domestic Violence Programme
The programme includes work with known victims and inter-agency risk management.
Programme aims:
• To reduce the risk of violent crime and abusive behaviour towards women in
relationships by helping perpetrators change their attitudes and behaviour
• To reduce the risk of all violent and abusive behaviour in the family
• To increase the offender’s ability to respond non-abusively, to change abusive beliefs
and empathise with his victim(s)
• To give offenders a greater sense of personal responsibility for their violence
• To help offenders accept that they exercise choice in the way they behave
• To increase the offender’s ability to identify high-risk situations and to effectively
manage these in the future
Who is suitable?
Male offenders who:
• are heterosexual
• have been assessed as a medium to high risk for relationship violence as indicated by
severity and/or pattern of abuse using the Spousal Abuse Risk Assessment (SARA)
• have committed at least one act of violence against an intimate partner
• have basic literacy, language competency and comprehension skills
• are willing to sign a consent form which will include the sharing of relevant information
with the offender’s spouse/partner
• Female offenders
• Offenders in same sex relationships
• Offenders with severe mental health issues
• Offenders who are judged unable to meet the learning outcomes because of, for
example, severe drug dependency
• Contact with the victim or current partner by a women’s safety worker

• Risk management through continual assessment and information sharing with other
agencies including the police
• Groupwork sessions and a minimum of nine individual sessions with the offender:
- Three individual pre-programme sessions to enhance motivation
- 26 groupwork sessions of two hours. This is sequential and is usually delivered
twice a week but can be delivered up to three times per week
- A minimum of four relapse prevention sessions
74
Appendix 3
Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP)
The programme includes work with known victims and inter-agency risk management.
Programme aims:
• To reduce the risk of violent crime and abusive behaviour towards women in
relationships by helping perpetrators change their attitudes and behaviour
• To reduce the risk of all violent and abusive behaviour in the family
• To increase the offender’s ability to respond non-abusively, to change abusive beliefs
and empathise with his victim(s)
• To give offenders a greater sense of personal responsibility for their violence
• To help offenders accept that they exercise choice in the way they behave
• To increase the offender’s ability to identify high-risk situations and to manage
effectively these in the future
Who is suitable?
Male offenders who:
• are heterosexual
• have been assessed as a medium to high risk for relationship violence as indicated by
severity and/or pattern of abuse using the Spousal Abuse Risk Assessment (SARA)
• have committed at least one act of violence against an intimate partner
• have basic literacy, language competency and comprehension skills
• are willing to sign a consent form which will include the sharing of relevant information
with the offender’s spouse/partner
• Female offenders
• Offenders in same sex relationships
• Offenders who are judged unable to meet the learning outcomes because of, for
example, severe drug dependency
The Programme involves:
• Contact with the victim or current partner by a women’s safety worker

• Risk management through continual assessment and information sharing with other
agencies including the police
• Groupwork and individual sessions with the offender
- Four individual pre-programme sessions
- A rolling programme of 27 two-hour groupwork sessions and six individual sessions
- At least four relapse prevention sessions with the case manager
75
Conditional
Appendix 4 Cautions
- Conditional Cautions
Appendix 4: Conditional Cautions
The Criminal Justice Act provides the relevant authorities with the ability to issue adult
offenders with a Conditional Caution, if certain requirements are met.
Key Elements
A Conditional Caution is a new disposal available for adults (18+) who are willing to admit
their guilt. It is not a court order. It is administered by the Police and the Crown Prosecution
Service (CPS).
The scheme is aimed at cases where the public interest would be met more effectively by
offenders carrying out specific conditions, which are attached to a Caution, rather than being
prosecuted.
The conditions must either help rehabilitate the offender and/or ensure that he or she makes
reparation for the effects of the offence on the victim or the wider community. Offenders who
fail to comply with the conditions will usually be prosecuted for the original offence.
The basic criteria that must be satisfied before a conditional caution can be considered are:
• that the offender is 18 or over;

• that the offender admits the offence to the authorised person in a cautioned interview,
and
• that there is, in the opinion of the relevant prosecutor, evidence sufficient to charge the
offender with the offence. (Note that the person to whom the admissions are made
may be a police officer, but a decision to issue a Conditional Caution must be taken by
a prosecutor)
Aims of the scheme
The aims of the scheme are to:
• increase flexibility with regard to disposals and diversion from prosecution in

appropriate cases
• improve victim satisfaction
• contribute to the offences brought to justice target (by freeing up more court time to
deal with more complex cases)
• build on cross-cutting working practices introduced through the joint charging initiative
Benefits of the scheme
The following benefits are anticipated:
• Court time freed up so more serious cases can be brought to justice

• Speedier, more cost-effective resolution of cases
• Improved victim satisfaction and public confidence
• Offenders gain access to treatment for drug or alcohol interventions more speedily
• Increased community participation in the delivery of local justice
76
Appendix 4 - Conditional
Appendix
Cautions
4
Approach
A phased implementation has taken place in seven sites, including the Community Justice
Centre in Liverpool, and planning for staged national roll-out in the remaining police force
areas has begun. This has enabled the project to undertake research in order to assess the
impact of the scheme on those organisations involved in the implementation and to assess
resource and cost implications.
National roll-out plans
Planning for national roll-out of the scheme is well under way and all areas have appointed
a senior responsible officer, with many, particularly those planning to implement earliest,
setting up their project teams. A national conditional cautions conference was held in
Preston, Lancashire, on 19 June 2006 in co-operation with Lancashire Constabulary, which
introduced the scheme to new areas and shared good practice.
A new Conditional Cautions Project Board has been established which will hold particular
responsibility for national roll-out of the scheme.
Conditional Caution project – reparative work pilots
Following the implementation of the scheme in seven police force areas it was decided to
pilot the use of unpaid work as a condition to a caution. This is known as reparative work.
The nature of the reparations should be linked in a direct way to the offence or type of
offence for which the Caution is issued. For example, someone who damaged the fittings
in a public park might be required to comply with a condition to assist in making good the
damage, or generally restoring the appearance of the park.
The pilot will be evaluated by the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Unit.
The aims of the this pilot project are:
• to test the feasibility of offering unpaid work as a condition of a caution

• to establish best practice in the the event of any decision to expand or roll out the pilot
• to provide evaluation results that facilitate policy making in this area
• to provide information on the expected costs of offering and running reparative work
projects, and
• to test different models of delivery, to include partnership with the voluntary and
community sector
In more general terms, this project shares with the wider conditional cautions project the
following aims:
1. To reduce re-offending by imposing more timely and appropriate punishments

2. To increase the efficiency and efficacy of the CJS through good use of the resources
of the police, CPS and courts
77
Research 5on- Research
Appendix the Effectiveness
on the Effectiveness
of Sentencingofand
Sentencing
Interventions
and Interventions
Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and
Appendix 5: Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and

Interventions
The Research, Development and Statistics (RDS) Directorate at the Home Office carries out
work in two areas likely to be of direct interest to the courts:
• research into the effectiveness of sentences

• research into the effectiveness of correctional interventions
An immediate difficulty with the first of those tasks is, of course, that sentencing has
a variety of aims. Effectiveness tends to be defined and measured as the impact that
sentencing has upon offending. That approach is suitable for those sentencing aims which
have reduction of re-offending as their goal - rehabilitation or deterrence - but is less so for
aims such as punishment and reparation.
Most of the evidence here is in the form of aggregate reconviction rates for different
sentence types. But the difficulty in interpreting these is that variations in reconviction rates
both between and within broad sentence types are difficult to separate out from differences
in the particular characteristics of the offenders who receive them. For example, one might
expect less serious, lower risk offenders commonly to be fined. That is then likely to result in
relatively low reconviction rates for that disposal because that type of offender is less likely
to re-offend than higher risk counterparts receiving other sentences.
While the evidence for the effectiveness of individual sentences is either sparse or hard to
interpret, the research-driven approach to the ‘What works’ model of dealing with offenders
means that much more is known about the second area, the effects of different correctional
interventions (in other words, the means by which sentences are enacted). The recent
report, ’The impact of corrections on re-offending’ (Home Office Research Study 291
(2004)), looked in detail at how effective the individual components of different correctional
interventions are in reducing re-offending. It identified a broad range of interventions that
can reduce reconviction. These include offending behaviour programmes, basic skills
education, drug treatment and the custody-to-work programme.
Although the evidence base for these is growing in quality and quantity, there are a number
of issues the Probation Service needs to address to ensure that good quality research
evidence that is needed on effectiveness is produced. It is important to stress that not all
research has equal merit. Much research is done using weak or flawed methods. This can
significantly undermine the value of the results it produces. Of course, sometimes limitations
in the design of a study are unavoidable due to constraints of time or resources. Yet even
given these sorts of restrictions, there is usually still scope for researchers to maximise the
quality of any study they are undertaking.
RDS NOMS has been concentrating on the following issues in efforts to improve both the
quality and practical utility of our research on effectiveness:
Improving research design
The question of whether a particular intervention works can usually only be answered
relatively, i.e. works in relation to what? We usually attempt to do this by comparing the
outcome(s) of interest for those who have received a particular intervention with another
group who have not received it. The latter are usually known as the ‘control’ or ‘comparison’
group and provide the position against which the effects of the intervention under study can
78 78
Appendix 5 Appendix 5 - Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions
Appendix 5
be measured. Without such a comparison, we cannot be sure that any changes in outcome
for those receiving the intervention actually arose from the intervention and would not have
occurred anyway.
To be a true comparison, it must be made on a ‘like for like’ basis. Otherwise we will
not know whether any observed differences between those offenders who receive the
intervention and those receiving a different disposal are really due to the effect of the
intervention, as opposed to differences in the characteristics and propensities of the
offenders in the two groups. The sophistication with which studies have been able to match
the intervention and comparison groups, and thus control the effects of other factors, varies.
But limitations on the availability of information to be used for matching means it is rarely
done very robustly. Because of this, many studies fail to produce conclusive evidence on
effectiveness.
The best way of testing the effects of an intervention is by randomly assigning people to
either intervention or control group. The process of random assignment minimises the
chance that however carefully matched, the control and intervention groups still differ
from each other in significant ways. These studies are called ‘Randomised Controlled
Trials’ (RCTs) and are commonly used in medical research. Using this method we can be
truly confident that any differences between the intervention and controls are due to the
intervention alone.
While RCTs are preferable for research reasons, there may be potential legal, practical
and ethical obstacles to their use in many circumstances. Because of these, they have
only rarely been used in criminal justice research (although they have been used abroad
and the Home Office is currently piloting Restorative Justice (RJ) schemes using an RCT
design). However, these challenges are not usually insurmountable and many objections
to RCTs can be overcome when stakeholders fully understand the purpose and value of
their use. RCTs would only be used where the effect of an intervention is not clearly known
and we need to establish not only whether it produces any benefits but also whether it has
any harmful or negative effects. This type of evidence is needed to determine what works
to reduce re-offending and, in doing so, to drive the most cost-effective use of NOMS
interventions.
Thus, the RDS NOMS research and evaluation programme is developing the use of RCTs
for evaluation of NOMS interventions. In some instances RDS will need the agreement and
support of the courts to help them achieve this.
Improving the quality of the measures and the data used
Using the best-possible research design is not the only important factor in producing better
evidence on effectiveness. RDS aim to improve the quality of evidence by:
• Ensuring that studies are designed with sufficiently large sample

sizes. Insufficient sample size is a major cause of studies producing inconclusive
results, as it means that the study will be less likely to detect small effects or the
results may not be generalisable to other samples.
• Improving the use of reconviction data. While it has its limitations,

reconviction data is the only systematic, reliable and readily accessible means
of measuring offending that exists. We are exploring how we can examine the
frequency and severity of reconvictions and not just whether a person was reconvicted
79 79
Research 5on- Research
Appendix the Effectiveness
on the Effectiveness
of Sentencingofand
Sentencing
Interventions
and Interventions
Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and
or not. RDS are also supplementing reconviction data with other measures of impact
or change, for example, offenders’ attitudes, or their use of alcohol or drugs, including
OASys data on offenders’ needs.
• Improving their understanding of how interventions work. Without an

understanding of this, they will not be able to explain why interventions produce the
outcomes that they do. RDS is planning several longitudinal cohort studies that will
look in more detail at the relationships between interventions delivered and re-
offending or offending-related outcomes for different types of offenders, this includes
OASys data on offenders’ needs.
80 80
Appendix 6 Appendix 5 - Research on the EffectivenessAppendix
of Sentencing
6 - National
National
and Interventions
Standards
Standards
Appendix 6: National Standards
The following is a summary of the National Standards by which the National Probation
Service will operate. The full version is available on www.probation.justice.gov.uk
1. The Probation Service will operate to at least the minimum National Standards for
service delivery, noting the features, purpose and applicability of the Standards and
the expectations placed upon Probation Boards.
2. Where a court requests a report from the Probation Service prior to sentencing, an
appropriate assessment will be made of the offender’s risk of harm and the likelihood
of re-offending, in order to inform the court of a clear and realistic recommendation for
sentence or remand.
3. Sentenced cases should be allocated to an offender manager as soon as practicable

after sentence.
4. Offender managers will commence the sentence promptly and induct the offender into
the requirements of the sentence and the expectations being placed upon him.
5. A plan for how the sentence will be implemented and who will be required to
implement it will be produced as soon as is feasible.
6. The implementation of the punitive requirements of the sentence will be prioritised.
7. The implementation of the restrictive requirements of the sentence will be prioritised.
8. The implementation of the constructive requirements of the sentence will commence

as soon as possible following sentence, having regard to the need to integrate with
the punitive and restrictive elements.
9. Where the offender fails to comply with the sentence, the offender manager will take
steps to enforce the requirements of the sentence promptly.
10. The offender manager will monitor the delivery of the sentence plan, review progress
against the plan, revise the plan as necessary and, at the end of the sentence,
evaluate the extent to which the plan achieved its objectives.
11. Victims, or their families, in cases involving a serious sexual or violent offence which
leads to a custodial sentence of 12 months or more, will be offered contact with the
Probation Service.
12. The Probation Service, or its contractor, will operate approved premises, where
available with the aim of protecting the public from offenders or bailees posing a high
or very high risk of harm.
81 81
Appendix 7
5 - Glossary
Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions Appendix 7
APPENDIX 7
GLOSSARY
ACPO Association of Chief Police Officers

ASBO Anti-Social Behaviour Order
ASRO Addressing Substance Related Offending
CALM Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it programme
CDRP Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership
CDVP Community Domestic Violence Programme
CJA Criminal Justice Act 2003
CJCSA 2000 Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000
CJS Criminal Justice System
CO Community Order
CPA Care Programme Approach
CPS Crown Prosecution Service
CSAP Correctional Services Accreditation Panel
C-SOGP Community Sex Offender Groupwork Programme
DAT Drug Action Team
DIDs Drink Impaired Drivers Programme
DPP Director of Public Prosecutions
DRR Drug Rehabilitation Requirement
DYOI Detention in a Young Offenders Institution
EPP Extended Sentence for Public Protection
GOBP General Offending Behaviour Programme
HMCS Her Majesty’s Courts Service
HMPS Her Majesty’s Prison Service
IDAP Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme
IPP Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection
LPSR Lifer Post-Sentence Report
LSP Life Sentence Plan
MALRAP Multi-Agency Lifer Risk Assessment Panel
MAPPA Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
NOMS National Offender Management Service
NPS National Probation Service
N-SOGP Northumbria Sex Offender Groupwork Programme
OASys Offender Assessment System
OSAP Offender Substance Abuse Programme
PPO Prolific and Priority Offenders
PRISM Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse programme
PSR Pre-sentence report
RCT Randomised Controlled Trial
RDS Research, Development and Statistics directorate (Home Office)
RJ Restorative Justice
SGC Sentencing Guidelines Council
TV-SOGP Thames Valley Sex Offender Groupwork Programme
UW Unpaid Work Requirement
YOI Young Offenders Institute
82 82
83
84
Published by:
National Offender Management Service
Abell House
John Islip Street
London
SW1P 4LH
www.probation.justice.gov.uk

UK Home Office: Probation Bench Handbook 2nd Edition 2007

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

UK Home Office: Probation Bench Handbook 2nd Edition 2007

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Probation

I welcome the ���������������������������������������������������������������������

Lord Chief Justice

Introduction: The Sentencing Provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 1

Chapter 1: Bail 2-5

Bail information reports 2

Chapter 2: Pre-Sentence Reports 6-8

Chapter 3: Community Order 9-29

The Requirements 10-11

Enforcement of Community Orders 26-28

Chapter 4: Electronic Monitoring 30-35

Chapter 5: Custodial Sentences (including licence arrangements) 36-44

Prison sentences of 12 months or longer 36

Chapter 6: Mentally Disordered Offenders 45-52

Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment 49-52

1. Offender Assessment 53-56

3. Offending Behaviour Programmes 58-75

• The Accreditation Process 59

4. Conditional Cautions 76-77

5. Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions 78-80

6. National Standards summary 81

• The punishment of offenders

The new sentences

The Criminal Justice Act sentences currently in force are:

The sentences and provisions not yet implemented are:

• Custody Plus – not available.

Other New or Revised Disposals:

Bail Accommodation and Support Services

The availability of accommodation and/or support for individual defendants will be

Referral To Approved Premises

Approved premises (previously known as probation hostels) provide an enhanced level of

• defendants on bail in criminal proceedings

In terms of bail referrals, priority is given to:

Approved premises provide enhanced supervision of offenders in the interests of public

• Not to contact named people (e.g. victims or known criminal associates)

• Required standards of behaviour

Breach and enforcement

b) contains information as to such matters, presented in such manner as may be prescribed

When to Seek a Report

• where the sentencer is minded to impose a fine only.

There are two national PSR templates available:

Every PSR should be:

• Objective, impartial, free from discriminatory language and stereotype, balanced,

• Completed following a risk of harm screening and a likelihood of reconviction

• Based on at least one interview with the offender

Every court report should include:

In all PSRs report writers must make a sentencing proposal.

THE COMMUNITY ORDER

Requirements can be combined to produce an individual package for each offender,

The Requirements available for use in a Community Order are:

The following descriptions of the 12 Requirements include suggestions for

Unpaid Work (UW)

Seriousness levels: Medium – 20 to 30 days

In an Activity Requirement the offender must present himself to a person or persons

The places specified must be a community rehabilitation centre or a place approved by

• Employment, Training and Education – e.g. provided through a local college

Where a specialised assessment is required to determine the precise programme of

Where the development of Employment, Training and Education interventions is identified

A programme will normally be combined with a Supervision Requirement to provide

Multiple Programme Requirements

For full details of accredited programmes, please refer to Page 58.

A Prohibited Activity Requirement proscribes a particular behaviour in contrast to an

I welcome the ��